WH stonewalls Roberts documents, risks Constitutional crisis

[enough]

Stonewall Roberts: WH Won't Turn Over SG Documents
by Armando (Daily Kos)
Sat Aug 6th, 2005 at 08:29:41 PDT

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/8/6/112941/0134

snip>

Moreover, any recognition of the attorney-client privilege by the courts does not bind the Congress. When Clinton invoked attorney client privilege, then-Senator Fred Thompson, the person designated by the White House to shepard the Roberts nomination, stated in unequivocal terms that:

"An invocation of attorney-client privilege is not binding on Congress. It is well established that in exercising its Constitutional investigatory powers, congress possesses discretionary control over a witness' claim of privilege. It is also undisputed that Congress can exercise its discretion completely without regard to the approach the courts might take with respect to that same claim."

snip>

So let's be clear here. What BushCo is REALLY doing is invoking Executive Privilege, not attorney client privilege. Seen in this manner, we can understand how brazen and audacious this stonewall from BushCo is. What Bush is saying to the Senate is that even though you want these memos in the exercise of your Constitutional duty to advise and consent on the naming of a Supreme Court Justice, we don't care. We don't want you to see these memos, even thought the documents clearly are no longer sensitive or timely, they are at least 12 years old after all.

What this means is Bush is prepared to provoke a Constitutional crisis, this is no hyperbole, a clash between the Executive and Legislative branches, over 12 year old memos that are clearly not relevant or important to any current matter being considered by the Executive branch.

more>

[Trillo]

1. This, IMO, is the biggest issue regarding Roberts,

IOW, the failure of the White House to be transparent to those entrusted with confirmation.

This White House has created the most transparancy for citizens since I've been alive, at the same time, it's the least transparant WH during the same time period.

Hypocrisy.

[Poppyseedman]

2. What this means is Bush is prepared to provoke a Constitutional crisis,

this is no hyperbole. Yes, it is.

More than half of the Senators are lawyers. Lawyers protect their own self interest almost as often as politicians. Since they are both politicians and lawyers, we're screwed

Just wait until Roberts invokes the "Ginsberg rule" with Senator Kennedy, then you will see some real hyperbole.

[enough]

3. What is the "Ginsberg rule?"

[halobeam]

5. good question....

[CityDem]

6. Ginsberg Rule

Ruth Bader Ginsberg respectfully refused to answer a host of questions (30+) relating to past SCOTUS rulings, current hot button issues, etc. She stated that these issues may come before the court and she did not want to stake out any position during her confirmation hearings. She had an extensive paper record from her days in private practice and while on the circuit court -- she answered questions regarding her previous rulings. The repbubs are attempting to shield Roberts (who does not have a paper trail) from answering questions on important issues.

[enough]

7. Interesting. Didn't know that about Ginsberg.

I associate that tactic with Clarence Thomas, who went so far as to say that he had hardly THOUGHT about abortion any time in his life before his confirmation hearing.

[wli]

4. eh? the Bush admin. has been a constitutional crisis from day 1