Political Hotsheet
March 4, 2009 10:16 PM

Executive Privilege Compromise: Win-Win-Win

(CBS)
Believe it or not, this is precisely the way the Founding Fathers envisioned how the Constitution could work. Pressure from the judicial branch (a pending deadline to file a substantive brief) and the legislative branch (Congressional subpoenas to Bush officials) forced the White House into compromising over the scope of executive privilege in the U.S. Attorney matter. It’s a win-win-win, Steve Carell would say.

Or, you can look at it another way. The deal that finally delivers Karl Rove and Harriet Miers into Rep. John Conyers Congressional den of inquiry came about because neither the Obama Administration, nor the Congress, wanted to risk creating “bad” legal precedent about the scope of the privilege—federal law that might be political convenient now, but which could hinder future administrations (or even this one, a few years down the road).

Uncertainly about the results of litigation is what makes all sorts of parties settle all sorts of disputes all over the country—it worked this time, too.

The Obama Administration retains some flexibility to deal with future episodes where the president may not want his men and women talking. Congress gets to move its important investigation forward. The federal courts dodge a dicey political bullet. Team Bush gets to say it stayed true to its expansive view of the privilege. And Rove, Miers and company get to come in from the cold for a face-saving shot at telling the truth.

However you look at it, this compromise is a good thing for anyone and everyone who wants more (and more complete) answers about why all those U.S. attorneys were fired for political reasons, during the second term of the Bush administration.

Who gave the orders? Why? Who covered it up? Why? An official and thorough accounting is long overdue. The only regret I am sure many Americans have is that they aren’t likely to be able to watch the proceedings, live or on tape.

An interesting part of the deal, the details of which haven’t yet hit the rest of us, is that the Obama administration formally superseded the eleventh-hour order from Fred Fielding, White House Counsel for President Bush, who directed the potential witnesses not to testify even after the president they served was no longer in office. Fielding’s maneuver pushed against the outer edges of the doctrine. I look forward to reading precisely how far back the Obama lawyers were willing to roll the privilege, or if they were at all.

More soon when there are more details…
Tags:
Executive Privilege ,
u.s. attorneys ,
constitution ,
justice department ,
karl rove ,
obama ,
harrier miers
Topics:
Justice
Share:
  • Share
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Mixx
Add a Comment
by sarahfalcon March 5, 2009 1:52 PM EST
It is unfortunate that the public is being prevented from getting the story. As National Coalition Against Censorship Executive Director Joan Bertin writes, "We have to hope that the members of Congress who achieved this compromise will not suppress the information they uncover. We all have a right to know what public officials have been doing on our dime and in our name."

http://ncacblog.wordpress.com/2009/03/05/the-right-to-know-what-karl-rove-harriet-miers-did-on-our-dime-and-in-our-name/
Reply to this comment
by mattcat25 March 5, 2009 10:40 AM EST
The Karl Rove Presidential Administration was responsible for attempting to POLITICIZE THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT by pressuring US Attorneys to pursue indictments against oppositional political party members expressly for alleged election improprieties and voter fraud.

Rove had knowledge that Republican Election Victories had been manipulated by the Voter Machine Company Diebold. Karl Rove wanted to smear Democratic Candidates to obscure and haze the voter fraud issue in a preemptive effort even in cases where neither fraud nor improprieties took place.

No one is above the Law in the United States even President Karl Rove.
Reply to this comment
by frankie2fing March 5, 2009 9:47 AM EST
If I remember correctly, it wasn't Karl Rove who "leaked" Valerie Plame's name---it was Richard Armitage.
Posted by spneumatic

Maybe, at least he was the one who admitted to it. The liar Libby (Scooter Libby, Libby, Lbibby...Is going to jail, jail, jail... where he'll take it, take it, take it... in the tail, tail, tail! Scooter Libby, Libby, Libbly, had some power, power, power.... he better hold onto the soap in the shower, shower, shower!) would have spilled all the beans if dubya had not commuted ('This sentence is too excessive for the crime, therefore I am commuting Mr. Libby's sentence.") his sentence. And they say we have no king.
Reply to this comment
by 1survivor March 5, 2009 8:59 AM EST
After we won the Revolutionary War patriots gave Tories (people who supported the king) a choice of "He.., Hold, or Halifax". Executive privilege is a president usurping power. From whom is the power taken in a democracy? It is something only a Tory could love.

I have firsthand experienced the tyranny executive privilege represents. Look at who and what Bush protected when he first used executive privilege (FBI-Winter Hill Gang murder conspiracy). I sadly must report: The Tories are back!
Reply to this comment
by spneumatic March 5, 2009 8:53 AM EST
tmittelstaed wrote: This is the guy that has no compunction about leaking the names of our spies to the press, after all.


If I remember correctly, it wasn't Karl Rove who "leaked" Valerie Plame's name---it was Richard Armitage.
Reply to this comment
by gunnerv1 March 5, 2009 7:48 AM EST
Obama didn't want to change it because in a few years he'll be the one calling for Executive Privilege to cover his own bu*t.
Reply to this comment
by tmittelstaed March 5, 2009 7:07 AM EST
Frankly what do they think they are going to get out of it? Rove is just going to give his usual baloney excuses and use the opportunity to grandstand for Republicans. This is the guy that has no compunction about leaking the names of our spies to the press, after all.
Reply to this comment
by jetranger7 March 5, 2009 1:47 AM EST
Repulsive Carl Rove should be Immediately ARRESTED and DETAINED, by any means possible, and those that attempt to harbor or stand in the way of his arrest should also be Detained and dealt with ! WANTED- CARL ROVE - for TREASON against AMERICA- DETAIN and ARREST Immediately - NO ACCEPTIONS !
Reply to this comment
by jerryspoor March 4, 2009 11:18 PM EST
This should be a good test of our legal system and our government. I do not know enough about the law to take bets on either side.
Reply to this comment

About Political Hotsheet

Stay up to the minute on the latest news and developments from Washington, from the White House to Congress and everything in-between with the best political reporters from CBS News and CBSNews.com.

E-Mail Political Hotsheet
Follow On Twitter

Add to your favorite news reader
google
yahoo
msn
HOTSHEET ON TWITTER