January 30th, 2006
Help me brainstorm
Inspired by a commenter — how many times have the Bushies claimed executive privilege and refused to release info? So far I’ve got:
–9/11 preparedness
–Katrina preparedness
–Cheney’s (energy) task force
–extent of contact with Ken Lay
–extent of contact with Abramoff
–John Roberts correspondence
…oh, and of course, the specifics of the NSA spying itself.
Add to the list in comments.
posted by Tom Tomorrow at 4:06 PM | link
January 30th, 2006 at 4:09 pm
Who met and what was discusses in meetings over the Energy policy.
January 30th, 2006 at 4:18 pm
I guess the Harriet Meyers nom probably counts, they weren’t at all forthcoming before she withdrew.
January 30th, 2006 at 4:18 pm
Make lists! Over here in Australia, our best online political newsletter, crikey.com.au, invites contributors to help in drawing up lists on political issues, and crikey’s List of Lists is regularly consulted by journos looking for background. Its a great way to engage your readers and the resulting lists are often real shockers. Onya.
January 30th, 2006 at 4:20 pm
it wasn’t executive privilege exactly, but scott mclellan sure “can’t comment on an ongoing investigation” into who leaked the identity of cia agent valerie plame.
January 30th, 2006 at 4:30 pm
searching on google, found this, I have no memory of it:
Published on Friday, December 14, 2001 in the Boston Globe
WASHINGTON - President Bush yesterday invoked executive privilege to block a congressional subpoena exploring abuses in the Boston FBI office, prompting the chairman of a House committee to lambaste his fellow Republicans and triggering what one congressman said is the start of ‘’a constitutional confrontation.'’
link:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1214-01.htm
January 30th, 2006 at 4:30 pm
Results 1-10 of about 2,620,000 for “executive privilege bush”
Here’s a biggie:
Bush uses executive privilege to block Harriet Miers’ documents
January 30th, 2006 at 4:42 pm
Didn’t he decline to be sworn in by the 9/11 commission on the basis of executive privelege? Not quite the same, I know..
January 30th, 2006 at 4:43 pm
Don’t forget all the papers having to do with his dad’s involvement in Reagan’s October Surprise that were supposed to be released, but now are sealed, along with all other Presidential Papers, for, like, a zillion years.
See the end of this Robert Parry story:
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/011906.html
January 30th, 2006 at 4:44 pm
BTW, comments, finally! This was the first blog I ever read, before I’d even heard the word. And congrats on the new book (I know, wrong thread).
January 30th, 2006 at 4:47 pm
.
Refusal to discuss/prosecute torture of POW’s.
Refused to testify under oath .. recall, chimpy had unKKKLe snarl to hold his hand while they lied shamelessly.
January 30th, 2006 at 4:57 pm
At the very beginning of his administration he blocked release of documents pertaining to GHWBush’s presidency, didn’t he?
January 30th, 2006 at 4:58 pm
Downing Street Memo, the meetings that they are referring to.
Iraq war intelligence gathering. (sorta of goes with the one above)
Lost money in Iraq.
Medicaid debacle, not sure but I believe there was an issue with the gentlemen who initially put the cost at at least double the amount they were selling it to the public.
January 30th, 2006 at 5:05 pm
This isn’t all specifically executive privilege, but it’s all very useful. please continue. Sometimes my tired old brain can use a nudge.
January 30th, 2006 at 5:24 pm
Great idea. I posted a link on my blog to this entry to try and get people to help build this list. It would provide a definate insight into how the administration likes to hide stuff from the public.
Jamie
http://intoxination.blogspot.com
January 30th, 2006 at 5:42 pm
Here are a couple links regarding an executive order Bush signed which asserts executive privilege regarding FBI informants who were shielded from prosecution by the FBI.
Story on CBS.com
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/10/national/main577461.shtml
Commentary on the matter by William Safire:
http://www.truthinjustice.org/exec-priv.htm
Google cache of Robert Novak commentary on the matter:
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:P3pXeGuwl68J:www.townhall.com/columnists/robertnovak/printrn20020121.shtml+flemmi+executive+privilege&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=8
(hope these links work. I wish there was a preview button)
January 30th, 2006 at 5:53 pm
The first time Bush invoked executive privlege was, like Greg noted, regarding the Boston FBI informant investigation in 2001.
See the New York Times article titled “Bush Claims Executive Privlege in Response to House Inquiry” by Neil A. Lewis published on 14 December 2001. (Also an editorial: “Misusing Executive Privlege” 15 December 2001, and an op-ed: “Executive Privlege Again” by William Safire 3 January 2002.)
There is actually still an ongoing lawsuit to get the records, which have still — to my knowledge — not been released.
January 30th, 2006 at 5:54 pm
Obviously, I can’t spell…
January 30th, 2006 at 5:59 pm
Here is an article at msnbc.com which discusses the potential testimony of Condoleeza Rice before the 9/11 panel which the administration was resisting on grounds of executive privilege:
January 30th, 2006 at 6:28 pm
Ashcroft refused to give the congress the torture memos because . He denied that he was invoking executive privilege, but gave this as his reason:
That sounds a lot like executive privilege to me.
Partial transcript can be found here
January 30th, 2006 at 6:42 pm
Here’s a column by John Dean discussing the use of executive privilege regarding the withholding of the President’s Daily Brief of August 12, 2002.
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030729.html
January 30th, 2006 at 7:06 pm
Someone else mentioned this, but here’s a link to a column at nationalreview.com which discusses the use of executive privilege by white house economic aide Doug Badger to avoid testifying about the predicted cost of the medicare prescription drug benefit.
http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock200406010835.asp
January 30th, 2006 at 7:18 pm
The role of the ‘office of special plans’ and Doug Fieth in the runup to the worst planed war ever. The pentagon refuses to cooperate with the so-called ‘phase 2′ investigation
January 30th, 2006 at 7:29 pm
two words:
john bolton
January 30th, 2006 at 8:49 pm
Here’s a good one … At one point they insinuated that there was other evidence besides the forged Niger documents that supported the African uranium story but they couldn’t release it for national security reasons.
Also the justice department sicced “the State Secrets Privilege” on Sibel Edmonds to shut her up.
January 30th, 2006 at 9:20 pm
I was going to say John Bolton, but I refreshed the page, and someone beat me to it. I was wondering whether Mr. Tomorrow has access to LexisNexis? It’s a pretty good news search engine, but I understand it can be expensive for those not currently enrolled or otherwise involved with a University.
January 30th, 2006 at 9:46 pm
Thanks for opening up your blog for comments, Tom. It’s really nice.
January 30th, 2006 at 11:33 pm
Bush took successful pre-presidential actions to lock down his records as governor of Texas, laying the groundwork for the 2001 issued Executive Order 13233 to expand the use of executive privilege. Google EO 13233 for more articles on Bush2 going where Nixon only dreamed.
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0423-03.htm
January 30th, 2006 at 11:53 pm
As Bush keeps trying to quash all mention of Abramof attending meetings in the White House, look for them to hide behind executive privilege once again. Of course, Bush has been hiding behind privilege his entire life…
January 31st, 2006 at 12:29 am
How about the torture videos that the courts ordered released back in summer?
January 31st, 2006 at 1:27 am
When *hasn’t* the Bush Administration claimed “executive privilege”?
We should remember how much deference the GOP gave to “executive privilege” when it was Clinton in office, too…
January 31st, 2006 at 1:29 am
don’t recall exactly, but what about his dodgey “military service” records? Or were those just convienently “misplaced?”
January 31st, 2006 at 2:22 am
Not exactly “executive privilege” but the military refused to release the names of the Gitmo prisoners. The AP sued and has apparently won but I still haven’t seen the names published. I bet you 100 million blog bucks that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed isn’t on that list, so where is he? Diego Garcia?
January 31st, 2006 at 2:31 am
Oh yes and on point - in 8 years, Clinton invoked executive privilege a grand total of 4 times. And Reagan did so only 3 times.
January 31st, 2006 at 7:08 am
Wasn’t there some evidence that linked Osama Bin Laden to the 9/11 attacks that could not be shown to the Taleban for ‘National Security’ reasons?
It was the only reason that they didn’t hand him over, and the only reason why Afghanistan was attacked at all.
January 31st, 2006 at 3:14 pm
The Administration isn’t claiming executive priviledge about this, but they’ve been notorious for stonewalling and freezing FOIA releases. The Bushies have been secretive not only about their own administration and their own doings, but about past administrations as well.
They’ve scrubbed words & pictures they don’t like from transcripts & press conferences on the White House website, too. Much as I hate silly historical analogies, it’s hard not to think of the Soviets.
February 1st, 2006 at 2:20 pm
A list of some of the lies of w, in joke form….
President George W. Bush was scheduled to visit the Methodist Church outside Washington as part of his campaign. Karl Rove (the President’s political advisor) made a visit to the Bishop and said to him, “We’ve been getting a lot of bad publicity among Methodists because of Bush’s position on stem cell research, the War, and such. I’ll gladly make a contribution to the church of $100,000 if during your sermon you’d say the President is a saint.”
The Bishop thinks it over for a few moments and says, “The Church is in desperate need of funds. I will do it.”
Bush shows up that following Sunday, looking especially smug, sneering for his photo ops, while strutting his way, cowboy-style, into the church. As the sermon starts, the Bishop begins his homily:
“George Bush is a petty, self-absorbed hypocrite as well as a nitwit. He is a liar, a cheat, probably still a drunk, and a low-intelligence sneaky weasel. He has lied about his military record, and then had the gall to put himself in uniform on a military jet, landing on a carrier, and then posing before a banner stating ‘Mission Accomplished.’ He invaded a country for oil and money, all the while lying to the American people about the war, with nary a care for the thousands of lives it has taken and continues to take. He is the worst example of a Methodist I’ve ever personally known or known of.
But compared to Karl Rove, George Bush is a saint.”
February 2nd, 2006 at 11:37 am
Tom, Looks this this thread ran its course, thanks