Op-ed:

Executive Privilege...Obama’s Achilles heel

By: Diane Sori

Late yesterday afternoon, Rep. Darrell Issa’s House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, in an expected party line vote of 23 to 17, found Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress for failing to turn over the documents concerning Fast and Furious subpoenaed last November. Now going to the full House for the actual contempt vote sometime next week, no matter the final outcome, this bodes very badly for the DOJ, Holder, and especially Barack Hussein Obama.

Having previously said that he would NOT ask Obama to invoke Executive Privilege, Eric Holder did just that as he refused to turn over the Department of Justice documents Rep. Darrell Issa demanded.  When Obama invoked this privilege, he prevented himself and others in the White House from being forced to testify or to produce said documents.

Can you say cover-up!

With Holder unable to cut a deal because Issa would NOT accept the turnover of only ‘selected’ documents and briefings on what he would NOT turn over, the only logical reason the White House would assert this privilege is because Obama is somehow connected to this scandal, something we’ve all suspected since day one.  But Holder insists the documents subpoenaed are executive branch communications that Executive Privilege protects, and that Obama is NOT trying to hide any involvement in the operation.

To that I say bull, because if those documents Obama and Holder are trying so hard to hide show that Obama was even remotely involved or even just had a passing knowledge of the operation, it goes directly against sworn testimony given by Holder before the Oversight Committee.

Can you say perjury!

So even while the White House was still claiming it had nothing to do with Fast and Furious, with the asserting of Executive Privilege to protect his Attorney General, it became obvious that Obama wanted to conceal certain documents that would either implicate him or his administrative staff directly to the operation or to the cover-up in the aftermath of Border Agent Brian Terry’s death. 

 

So much for the self-proclaimed, most transparent president in history.

With this new development, some political pundits are contending that a Constitutional crisis and showdown are at hand for how can Obama assert Executive Privilege if he was NOT involved as he continues to claim.  But there really is no point of contention here because while Executive Privilege has been used by all presidents, nowhere in the Constitution is the term or even the concept of Executive Privilege mentioned.  Executive Privilege has solely been considered a right implied by the constitutional principal of separation of powers between the three branches of government.  Therefore, since it’s NOT specifically mentioned in the Constitution NO Constitutional crisis is possible.

End of that hoped for diversionary tactic.

But what exactly is Executive Privilege, the surprise Obama threw into the mix?  Simply, Executive Privilege is the power claimed by presidents to withhold from Congress, the courts, or individuals, information that has been requested or subpoenaed by the legislative and judicial branches of government.  Presidents claim that in order for their advisers, their ‘inner circle’ so to speak, to be open and forthcoming in giving much needed advice, that they must be assured their discussions will remain confidential and protected.  And if they don’t get that assurance than they simply will not be willing to give such advice knowing that someday they might be called to testify, under oath, before a congressional committee.

Now here's a possible 'gray area'...can Holder be considered an adviser to the president in his capacity as AG and thus be protected by Obama's Executive Privilege.  That will be something for Issa and the committee to discuss, and for the courts to decide.

But can Obama’s use of Executive Privilege in protecting Holder and himself be negated.  I believe it can since the courts have consistently held that Executive Privilege is not absolute and can be “overcome by an adequate showing of need,” as it did in United States v. Nixon (1974) when the Supreme Court ruled that Executive Privilege did not apply in a case where the President was attempting to avoid criminal prosecution.

   

If there was ever a case where a president is trying to avoid criminal prosecution this is it. 

And what makes Obama’s asserting Executive Privilege to protect Holder even worse is that he publicly criticized and condemned his favorite punching bag, George W. Bush, for his use of this very privilege in the controversy over the dismissal of US attorneys.  I guess as the old saying goes, ‘what’s good for the goose is NOT good for the gander.’

Or in Obama’s case...hypocrisy raises its ugly head yet again.

By asserting this privilege it’s apparent that if Barack Hussein Obama and Eric Holder had nothing to hide, the 80,000 documents that were subpoenaed over 8 months ago would have been turned over in full when first asked for, and there would have been no need for this Executive Privilege to have been implemented at all.

I hope Holder and Obama aren’t claustrophobic because I believe most jail cells are 6’ X 9’ at most.  Or will Holder throw Obama under the bus to save himself.  Only time will tell.