Durbin Calls Out White House On Executive Privilege Sham

[babylonsister]

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/08/02/durbin-jennings/

Durbin Calls Out White House On Executive Privilege Sham

When former White House aide Sara Taylor testified in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee last month, Chairman Pat Leahy (D-VT) asked whether President Bush had a role in the firings. Despite being under executive privilege, Taylor stated she did not attend meetings with Bush nor did she believe he was involved in the scandal.

In today’s hearing, Leahy asked the same question to White House aide J. Scott Jennings. In contrast to Taylor, Jennings refused to answer, repeatedly citing executive privilege. In fact, Taylor answered “a number of questions that Jennings has refused to answer,” despite both being under similar assertions of executive privilege.

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) noted the discrepancy between Taylor and Jennings’ responses and called out Jennings for abusing executive privilege. Jennings responded: “I respect {Taylor’s} decision…but I simply do not intend to disobey a directive from the President.”

Watch it/read transcript at link~

Jennings’ stonewalling is an attempt to further muddle the administration’s role in the attorney scandal. As Leahy asked Taylor last month, “what is the White House so intent on hiding?“:

I do note your answer that you did not discuss these matters with the president and to the best of your knowledge he was not involved is going to make some nervous at the White House because it seriously undercuts his claim of executive privilege if he was not involved. … Your testimony today under oath bolsters that impression. And that really shows, again, that the White House counsel’s broad instruction is not only unprecedented, but it’s unsound. … This broad invocation of the notion of executive privilege to obstruct Congress from learning the truth leads one to believe it’s part of a cover-up.

Paul Kiel adds that today, Jennings wouldn’t even answer what his job description is.

[C_U_L8R]

1. Where is this Executive Priviledge ????

Does it even exist? And if it does.. it's only a priviledge and certainly not a right.
Priviledges are granted out of courtesy and a priviledge abused can certainly be taken away.

It's time for this over-priviledge spoiled brat of a pretzeldunce to get the spanking of a lifetime.

[babylonsister]

2. I want to know where the executive is; this sorry excuse for a human

gets to call himself that?