FDL: Of Threats And Deletions...

[SlowDownFast]

Of Threats And Deletions And A Hefty Helping Of Hubris
By: Christy Hardin Smith

Paul Kiel at The Muck has an interesting post this morning, riffing off some comments made in a NYTimes article about the clashing understanding of oversight and disclosure between Congress and Fred Fielding in the White House Counsel's office. Paul has graciously posted a copy of the Fielding response letter to Sen. Leahy and Rep. Conyers, and there are a couple of sections that I want to highlight for everyone this morning, because I think they are dispositive of a number of things, not the least of which is the overwhelming contempt that the Bush White House has for anyone who is not a Bushie and who would dare to question them. To wit:

Although it consists of individual components, the proposal reflects a unified offer that, if accepted, would result in your Committees receiving a significant amount of information. We, therefore, respectfully decline your suggestion to immediately produce the documents that we are prepared to release as part of a carefully and thoughtfully considered package of accommodations designed to avoid shifting the dispute to ground on which we need not tread. With all respect, your suggestion fails to credit fully the extraordinary nature of the disclosure we are prepared ot provide, and might even prolong this dispute which the President is seeking to resolve in the most expeditious manner possible.

Allow me to translate the legalese for you: Mr. Fielding is using felicitous language to tell Mr. Leahy and Conyers to go Cheney themselves. The President does not want them getting their hands on this information quickly due to, one would assume, the need to comb over every sentence for potentially politically damaging information contained therein, so that a WH strategy to counter it might be put into place. (Read: Rove would like his ass covered, thank you very much.) Mr. Fielding is, therefore, threatening to litigate this matter of discovery through the courts rather than hand over relevant discovery to Congress — and threatens to do so pretty much up front here.

But it is a hollow bluff. And here is why: Mr. Fielding knows, as do any attorneys who are looking at this with an honest eye, that Executive Privilege will not apply to any e-mails which were sent on RNC servers. Nor does it apply to any e-mails sent between staffers. And, therefore, unless the communication is directly with George W. Bush, it is not privileged and is subject to discovery by Congress for the legitimate purposes of oversight.

more:http://www.firedoglake.com/2007/04/13/of-threats-and-deletions-and-a-hefty-helping-of-hubris/


UPDATE FROM CHS: I had e-mailed Patrick Fitzgerald's spokesperson last night to see if he had any comment on Mr. Rove's alleged deletion of e-mails from the RNC server during the time that the investigation would have been ongoing. I just got a response from Randall Samborn that, indeed, the office was aware of the reporting on this matter, that he had received not only my questions but a number of others from news organizations, but that he would be "declining comment (of course) to questions about this matter." I expected this, but I wanted to quote Randy exactly once I got his "no comment." If and when I get any further update or news from Mr. Fitzgerald's office, I will of course share it with you guys.

[DearAbby]

1. Since when was a Subpoena a suggestion?

We, therefore, respectfully decline your suggestion to immediately produce the documents...this made me spit up...I mean really, do they think they can bat Conyers and Sen. Leahy like pesky flies?


With all respect, your suggestion fails to credit fully the extraordinary nature of the disclosure we are prepared ot provide... Jesus how arrogant these people are! I am livid. The bastards must be hiding something that is going to blow everything out of the water...A congressional Subpoena is a suggestion...since the phuck when?