Reply #81: Regarding Executive Privilege ... the Supreme Court ruled in the Nixon case ...

[CRH]

the general privilege did not extend when it interfered with a prosecution of a criminal case, as stated several times above.

And in this case, that very same exception and ruling could apply, as mounting evidence suggests the testimony needed will prove obstruction of justice in on going corruption investigations, resulting in the Lam firing.

In case you are not aware of these threads, I will post them. They will add to the other mounting evidence that suggests these firings and subsequent protestations of executive privilege to suppress subpoenas and/or testimony, are nothing better at bottom than an attempted cover up of evidence in a criminal case.

Lam Firing DWW links

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x408673

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x417354

edit: for spelling