White House Dares Congress with Executive Privilege
After rejecting congressional subpoenas Thursday for Harriet Miers and Sara Taylor, the White House is now employing executive privilege to deny testimony from the two former aides in connection with the firings of 93 federal prosecutors last year.
Responding to their request by letter, White House counsel Fred Fielding told Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and House Committee Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) that their demands are "unreasonable because it presents a substantial incursion in presidential prerogatives," but the chairmen will not be stopped.
Leahy calls it "Nixonian stonewalling." Conyers sites this as another example of the "reckless disrespect this administration has for the rule of law," and has made clear that they won't play nice much longer.
"I hope the White House stops this stonewalling and accepts my offer to negotiate a workable solution," Conyers said as the threat of a congressional contempt citation loomed overhead.
"Contrary to what the White House may believe, it is the Congress and the courts that will decide whether an invocation of executive privilege is valid, not the White House unilaterally." Is the White House daring Congress to take it to court?
In a letter to the chairmen, Solicitor General Paul Clement said, "for the President to perform his constitutional duties, it is imperative that he receive candid and unfettered advice."
Veracifier's confused. We thought the president wasn't even involved in this. So what was that advice? - Raleigh-Elizabeth Smith
