' a very Nixonian mistake'

[Inthemiddle]

Holder and others have testified repeatedly that Obama had nothing to do with / no knowledge of 'fast and furious.'

Which is no different than when Bush was said to have had no involvement in the AG firings.

For Obama to be able to exercise 'executive privilege' to block Congressional oversight on any government agency at anytime, regardless of his involvement, is to allow a POTUS the power to block any Congressional oversight.

Part of your problem is that you're operating under the false premise that Congress has any right to oversee the executive branch. You're entirely in error on that note.

Left, Right and everyone else should be appalled at this, and it should not be permitted to stand.

It's called separation of powers.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

So far, this is the first time Obama has claimed Executive Privilege. I don't really see that as offending his transparency as President. Bush claimed EP six times, Clinton a whooping 14 times. So far, Obama is still on track to invoke EP the least amount of any President in two decades. If Obama wins re-election and never invokes EP again, he will be the least EP invoking President since Eisenhower.

Bush misusing Executive Privilege doesn't justify Obama misusing it

 

[Inthemiddle]

Bush misusing Executive Privilege doesn't justify Obama misusing it

Question is, did he misuse it?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Bush misusing Executive Privilege doesn't justify Obama misusing it

Question is, did he misuse it?

How many times what president used Executive Privilege is moot at this point for over a year holder and the white house has stated that obama did not have any knowledge of the program called fast and the furious. Since obama has used Executive Privilege he's saying he knew about it. So what did obama know and what is obama hiding. Also Executive Privilege only use is to information that would harm national security a secret. Since fast and the furious has nothing to do with national security obama misused it.
IT'S ALL MOOT NOW.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Bush misusing Executive Privilege doesn't justify Obama misusing it

Question is, did he misuse it?

I answered that already...re-read what you quoted

 

[Inthemiddle]

Bush misusing Executive Privilege doesn't justify Obama misusing it

Question is, did he misuse it?

I answered that already...re-read what you quoted

What, this:

Bush misusing Executive Privilege doesn't justify Obama misusing it

 

[SniperFire]

Holder and others have testified repeatedly that Obama had nothing to do with / no knowledge of 'fast and furious.'

Which is no different than when Bush was said to have had no involvement in the AG firings.

You are full of shit, Lefty:

Bush did not deny involvement:

'In October 2006, George W. Bush told Alberto Gonzales that he had received complaints that some of the U.S. Attorneys had not pursued certain voter-fraud investigations.'

Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Question is, did he misuse it?

I answered that already...re-read what you quoted

What, this:

Bush misusing Executive Privilege doesn't justify Obama misusing it

Yes...that....did I not just say both were missusing it?

 

[Inthemiddle]

Holder and others have testified repeatedly that Obama had nothing to do with / no knowledge of 'fast and furious.'

Which is no different than when Bush was said to have had no involvement in the AG firings.

You are full of shit, Lefty:

Bush did not deny involvement:

'In October 2006, George W. Bush told Alberto Gonzales that he had received complaints that some of the U.S. Attorneys had not pursued certain voter-fraud investigations.'

Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Know what you're talking about before you cherry pick things and twist them out of context.

That little tidbit you're quoting wasn't about Bush claiming to be involved with the firings. That's one of the things that made people suggest that Bush really was involved after all, and that his motivations were political.

 

[asaratis]

So far, this is the first time Obama has claimed Executive Privilege. I don't really see that as offending his transparency as President. Bush claimed EP six times, Clinton a whooping 14 times. So far, Obama is still on track to invoke EP the least amount of any President in two decades. If Obama wins re-election and never invokes EP again, he will be the least EP invoking President since Eisenhower.

It's not HOW MANY TIMES its done that counts...its WHAT IT'S ABOUT that counts.

All those that worship the Messiah Obama will claim he has done nothing wrong and should be left alone to pursue his dictatorial ruling of the American people.

All those that value freedom, justice and Constitutional law will say..."Hang his ass out to dry!"

The future of Barack Hussein Obama will include a bit of each.

Obama is TOAST!!

 

[SniperFire]

Which is no different than when Bush was said to have had no involvement in the AG firings.

You are full of shit, Lefty:

Bush did not deny involvement:

'In October 2006, George W. Bush told Alberto Gonzales that he had received complaints that some of the U.S. Attorneys had not pursued certain voter-fraud investigations.'

Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Know what you're talking about before you cherry pick things and twist them out of context.

That little tidbit you're quoting wasn't about Bush claiming to be involved with the firings.

Sure it was, moron.

 

[Inthemiddle]

I answered that already...re-read what you quoted

What, this:

Bush misusing Executive Privilege doesn't justify Obama misusing it

Yes...that....did I not just say both were missusing it?

Okay, I guess you did. However, I challenge whether either one misused EP in their respective instances.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What, this:

Bush misusing Executive Privilege doesn't justify Obama misusing it

Yes...that....did I not just say both were missusing it?

Okay, I guess you did. However, I challenge whether either one misused EP in their respective instances.

What does notional security have to do with fast and the furious?

 

[Inthemiddle]

It's not HOW MANY TIMES its done that counts...its WHAT IT'S ABOUT that counts.

I guess that depends on what people are talking about, exactly. I was addressing the comments about how invoking EP affects Obama's promises of transparency.

 

[whitehall]

Nixon's biggest mistake was being a republican. The only news available to the public during Watergate was news filtered through a liberal screen. There was no internet or even talk radio to balance the pressure of the Washington Post. How many people knew that Karl Marx Bernstein was raised by card carrying communists who taught him to hate Nixon because of his successful prosecutions while he was a federal attorney? What newspaper could get away with unverified information from a undisclosed "informant" kept secret for 30 years until he died and couldn't answer questions? Watergate was about a 3rd rate burglary by a "black bag" bunch of nut cases that were active in government since FDR. Fast/Furious involves murder and conspiracy by an out of control branch of federal law enforcement but the liberal majority in the media sees their jobs differently than they did 40 years ago. They are in the business of protecting corrupt administrations as long as they have a (D) at the end of their name.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

What, this:

Bush misusing Executive Privilege doesn't justify Obama misusing it

Yes...that....did I not just say both were missusing it?

Okay, I guess you did. However, I challenge whether either one misused EP in their respective instances.

Fair challenge. I don't think Obama was even involved in fast and furious....if it is true that he wasn't involved at all then there is no way he can claim "executive priveledge" as he was not part of it. That is where I say obama missused it.

I think Bush tried to use it to keep from getting political pressure over his decision, which is also an incorrect use of it.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Yes...that....did I not just say both were missusing it?

Okay, I guess you did. However, I challenge whether either one misused EP in their respective instances.

Fair challenge. I don't think Obama was even involved in fast and furious....if it is true that he wasn't involved at all then there is no way he can claim "executive priveledge" as he was not part of it. That is where I say obama missused it.

I think Bush tried to use it to keep from getting political pressure over his decision, which is also an incorrect use of it.

But do you know why Holder is being subpoenaed? The Oversight Committee wants to know why the DOJ recanted a letter sent to Congress last year about the Fast and Furious operation. DOJ pulled the letter back and said it was "inaccurate" and now the OC wants paperwork and communiques that would highlight the reason why this was done. We don't know the answer to that question right now, but for all we know there was a discussion between Obama and Holder that resulted in the decision to do that. And if so, then Obama is absolutely within rights to invoke EP.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Yes...that....did I not just say both were missusing it?

Okay, I guess you did. However, I challenge whether either one misused EP in their respective instances.

What does notional security have to do with fast and the furious?

bunp

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Okay, I guess you did. However, I challenge whether either one misused EP in their respective instances.

Fair challenge. I don't think Obama was even involved in fast and furious....if it is true that he wasn't involved at all then there is no way he can claim "executive priveledge" as he was not part of it. That is where I say obama missused it.

I think Bush tried to use it to keep from getting political pressure over his decision, which is also an incorrect use of it.

But do you know why Holder is being subpoenaed? The Oversight Committee wants to know why the DOJ recanted a letter sent to Congress last year about the Fast and Furious operation. DOJ pulled the letter back and said it was "inaccurate" and now the OC wants paperwork and communiques that would highlight the reason why this was done. We don't know the answer to that question right now, but for all we know there was a discussion between Obama and Holder that resulted in the decision to do that. And if so, then Obama is absolutely within rights to invoke EP.

What does notional security have to do with fast and the furious?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

' a very Nixonian mistake'

The rallying-cry of the......

....FAUX Noise/Limbaugh-LEMMINGS!!!!!

Stupid Fuckin' Teabaggers​