Why didn't Clinton claim Executive Privilege with Lewinsky?

[garybeck]

Now that would have been an appropriate use of Executive Privilege. then maybe that whole thing would have blown over and who knows, Gore might have won 2000 by enough to withstand all the thievery.

[DangerDave921]

1. I think he did

If I'm not mistaken, I believe Clinton tried to invoke executive privilege on this issue. I seem to recall something about secret service agents overhearing things, and Clinton arguing that these were protected conversations. I think SCOTUS ruled against him.

Anyone here with a better memory than me?

[newyawker99]

19. Hi DangerDave921!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[MonkeyFunk]

2. He did

[garybeck]

6. so the courts ruled that he himself had to testify on a personal matter

not related to politics in any way?

That being the case, if SCOTUS rules in favor of Bush's executive privilege,
it would prove once and for all they are partisan first and foremost.

[MonkeyFunk]

9. It likely wouldn't get to the USSC

neither side wants a definitive ruling from the supreme court.

[garybeck]

10. he *waived* executive privilege

according to Conyers:

"Conyers asked Bush to follow in the footsteps of Presidents Bill Clinton and Gerald Ford relating to similar congressional probes."

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Conyers_to_Bush_Follow_Clinton_and_0709.html

[MonkeyFunk]

11. yes

after a lot of legal wrangling, these cases are almost always mediated. Clinton LOST in court when a judge ruled against him. Then they negotiated the details of his testimony. That's what will happen in this case, too.

The likely outcome is that Meiers and Taylor will be interviewed, but not under oath.

[H2O Man]

15. You should consider

the circumstances. Clinton was facing what type of legal action? I'm not disagreeing with what you are saying in general, but the Clinton case isn't an example that really fits.

[SammyWinstonJack]

21. Much like bu$h v. Gore, the SCOTUS will say it was a one time ruling, not bearing on any future

case. Wasn't that what they argued when they made their final ruling in 2000?

[Uncle Joe]

29. Yes Bush vs Gore was "do as we say, not as we do",

that's what I got out of it.

[MonkeyFunk]

31. SCOTUS

never ruled on Clinton's executive privilege claim.

They did, however, rule unanimously that a sitting president could be sued.

[Yupster]

28. Here's a Washington Post story from back then

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/starr050698.htm

[Pawel K]

I'm glad he didn't

they would be claiming hypocrisy right now.

Executive privilege should never be used to cover your ass from your past illegal actions. At least Clinton had the moral high ground to not do this, and after it all ended I think it hurt the republicans more than the democrats. Clinton's approval ratings were over 60% when he left office, weren't they?

[MonkeyFunk]

8. But he did...

and he lost.

There was a substantive difference, though. Congress wasn't subpoenaing him, so there wasn't a big separation of powers issue here.

Like it or not Executive Privilege is real, and neither side really wants the Supreme Court to issue a decisive ruling one way or the other - these cases are always mediated before it reaches the USSC.

The only USSC case that I know of is regarding Nixon, and the courts ruled that only national security concerns could be considered.

[AlGore-08.com]

3. He tried - - a judge ruled that he couldn't. This is from 1998

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/05/05/executive.privilege/

Judge Rules Against Clinton On Executive Privilege
By Wolf Blitzer/CNN

WASHINGTON (May 5) -- In a setback for President Bill Clinton, a federal judge has ruled that White House aides may not claim executive privilege before the Whitewater grand jury looking into sex-and-perjury allegations against the president.

Unless the White House appeals and wins, the decision means White House aides Sidney Blumenthal and Bruce Lindsey will have to appear before the grand jury and answer its questions

The White House had sought to protect the aides from having to testify because of their close relationship with the president.

White House aides told The Associated Press that Clinton's claim was limited and sought to prevent questions about White House strategy, not Clinton's relationship with ex-White House intern Monica Lewinsky.

The grand jury is looking into reports that Clinton had a sexual relationship with Lewinsky and encouraged her to lie about it under oath. Clinton has denied both accusations.

(more... )

[Pawel K]

12. So doesn't that set a legal precedent that a president can not due this?

That would mean that Bush is currently in violation of the law, wouldn't it?

[MrModerate]

4. He didn't need to . . .

He needed to come out and say . . . "My relationship with Miss Lewinsky is a purely private matter, has no bearing on my official duties, and I will entertain no further questions on the topic. Thank you and good afternoon."

On such things do the history of the world turn.

[loyalkydem]

5. So

why won't a judge say this moron can't claim the privilege.

[Canuckistanian]

7. "the whole thing would have blown over"?

Somehow, I don't think so. It would have inflamed to the RWers to the point of insanity.

Do you not remember the atmosphere back then?

[Catherine Vincent]

20. "Do you not remember the atmosphere back then?"

I sure do. Republicans went Rabid!

[originalpckelly]

32. ROFL! "the whole thing would have blown over"

:rofl:

That doesn't sound right, considering the topic at hand. :rofl:

[leftofthedial]

13. that wasn't the script

[MonkeyFunk]

14. Are you saying

Clinton did NOT claim executive privilege?

[leftofthedial]

16. it wasn't the plan for his claim to stand

[MonkeyFunk]

17. what plan is that?

[leftofthedial]

18. plan 9

of course

[MonkeyFunk]

23. ah, excuse me

I thought we were having a serious discussion.

[leftofthedial]

24. okay, the corporatists' plan for seizing control of the USA then

[MonkeyFunk]

25. So you believe

Clinton was complicit in the entire Lewinsky/Whitewater scandal, to the point where he knew how judges would rule? And he played along?

That's crazy.

[leftofthedial]

26. I never said that.

I said the outcome was (to a large extent) scripted. The way was paved for the coup of 2000. Impeachment was dishonored and made much less likely for the coming neocon regime. Clinton was made a fool of.

[MonkeyFunk]

27. ok

I don't believe that. If I believed such plans could be made and implemented, I wouldn't live here.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

30. Yep.

Impeachment was dishonored and made much less likely for the coming neocon regime.

[BlooInBloo]

22. "that whole thing would have blown over" - Are you high?

[ben_meyers]

33. I think the court ruled that Executive Privilege

was related to conversations between the Executive and his advisors in the course of discussing policies regarding the running of the Government. I don't think that they thought Clintons relationship with Lewinky qualified as government business.