Judge Napolitano on ‘Fast and Furious’ Documents: Executive Privilege Only Applies If

[Peach]

Napolitano has an opinion, and it is in error.

Though the issue is loathsome, I believe the Court is correct. Focus on the House members on the panel, everyone who voted in favor of this disgusting act. Holder offered many of the documents to Issa, but the dirtbag wanted media time. Throw the scumbags OUT in November. A Democratic House would not pull this useless, waste of money ROUTINE.

 

[typicalusguy]

I find it interesting that the Kool-Aid crowd is now quoting Judge Napolitano after he was fired by Fox News.

Any port in a storm I guess...

 

[JakeStarkey]

The same outpouring of squall and bawl accompanied the dixiecrats in 1948, the segregationists in the 1950s and 1960s, the far left in the 1970s and 1980s. They all had in common the witness of their loss of status, prestige, and political power.

The same is happening to the extreme far right in America this summer.

The impending nomination of Romney means they no longer control the nomination process for the party's presidential candidate.

As they continue to lose power, the screaming and meanness will only increase for a while.

 

[Trajan]

Napolitano has an opinion, and it is in error.

didn't holder already testify that this wasn't a WH op or there was no communication with the WH on F&F?

how can you protect something you're not supposed to know about?

and why wait almost a year after the documents were asked for?

SCOTUS will determine that if asked by Congress.

thats not what I asked but hey, I didn't expect a straight answer from you anyway......

yes I see.....scotus...

watch Obama blow another one....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bpwYh9TD6Nc

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Napolitano has an opinion, and it is in error.

didn't holder already testify that this wasn't a WH op or there was no communication with the WH on F&F?

how can you protect something you're not supposed to know about?

and why wait almost a year after the documents were asked for?

SCOTUS will determine that if asked by Congress.

Under what theory of constitutional law?

 

[The T]

And while we're at it, Issa is a clown. His kangaroo court of a committee is a joke. He's saying Holder is violating the law by not handing over the documents, but they're many of the documents he's demanding are ones Holder is prohibited by law from handing over.

What law prohibits Holder from handing over documents to Congress?

Many of the documents Issa wants pertain to on-going investigations.

Really? And since the funding comes OUT of Congress? WHY wouldn't they be able to see them?

Keep up the excuses.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Trajan, this is politics, and it is a contact sport. Don't play if you don't want the contact.

SCOTUS will determine, not Congress.

 

[Liability]

Napolitano has an opinion, and it is in error.

didn't holder already testify that this wasn't a WH op or there was no communication with the WH on F&F?

how can you protect something you're not supposed to know about?

and why wait almost a year after the documents were asked for?

SCOTUS will determine that if asked by Congress.

You imagine that Congress will have to get all supplicant like for SCOTUS?

I don't think you get it.

THEY can move forward on an impeachment proceeding if they choose to.

Barring the impeachment option, though, they CAN: (a) seek a referral of the Contempt citation to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. That doesn't strike me as solving anything. Too much conflict of interest; or (b) they can pass a law to appoint their own special prosecutor (which COULD become a problem because of some separation of powers issues) or (c) they can pass a law to have a COURT appoint a special prosecutor.

It all takes time and it will all get attacked (ironically and disingenuously) by the liberal Democrats as being purely political.

So the dishonorable action of the cheap-ass President today IS an effective albeit temporary stalling technique. Since he is a lawless Chief Executive, he will not be bothered by this. He will view it as being JUST "politics." He is wrong. He is the epitome, now, of what's wrong with our system. Still, in terms of pure short term politics, it was a cheap but effective maneuver.

There will be hell to pay if he doesn't get control of the House and the Senate as well as winning re-election, though. He is in position to be the first FORMER President to face impeachment.

 

[Liability]

Trajan, this is politics, and it is a contact sport. Don't play if you don't want the contact.

SCOTUS will determine, not Congress.

If the Congresscritters choose not to man up, you are right.

But if they have any nadz at all, the impeachment route is the better one. And in that case, you will not just be wrong, but massively wrong.

 

[JakeStarkey]

didn't holder already testify that this wasn't a WH op or there was no communication with the WH on F&F?

how can you protect something you're not supposed to know about?

and why wait almost a year after the documents were asked for?

SCOTUS will determine that if asked by Congress.

You imagine that Congress will have to get all supplicant like for SCOTUS?

I don't think you get it.

THEY can move forward on an impeachment proceeding if they choose to.

Barring the impeachment option, though, they CAN: (a) seek a referral of the Contempt citation to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia. That doesn't strike me as solving anything. Too much conflict of interest; or (b) they can pass a law to appoint their own special prosecutor (which COULD become a problem because of some separation of powers issues) or (c) they can pass a law to have a COURT appoint a special prosecutor.

It all takes time and it will all get attacked (ironically and disingenuously) by the liberal Democrats as being purely political.

So the dishonorable action of the cheap-ass President today IS an effective albeit temporary stalling technique. Since he is a lawless Chief Executive, he will not be bothered by this. He will view it as being JUST "politics." He is wrong. He is the epitome, now, of what's wrong with our system. Still, in terms of pure short term politics, it was a cheap but effective maneuver.

There will be hell to pay if he doesn't get control of the House and the Senate as well as winning re-election, though. He is in position to be the first FORMER President to face impeachment.

Thank you for reminding me of impeachment as an option. I don't think it is viable in terms of success. This election coming up at the very worst for the Dems will leave them enough senators to acquit Obama if he is re-elected and impeached.

SCOTUS's findings on the Watergate papers drove Nixon to resignation, a third option, when his party leadership told him they would not protect him from impeachment and trrial.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

And while we're at it, Issa is a clown. His kangaroo court of a committee is a joke. He's saying Holder is violating the law by not handing over the documents, but they're many of the documents he's demanding are ones Holder is prohibited by law from handing over.

What law prohibits Holder from handing over documents to Congress?

Many of the documents Issa wants pertain to on-going investigations.

What law prohibits Holder from handing over documents to Congress?

 

[hjmick]

executive privilege legal definition of executive privilege. executive privilege synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

The right of the president of the United States to withhold information from Congress or the courts.

Historically, presidents have claimed the right of executive privilege when they have information they want to keep confidential, either because it would jeopardize national security or because disclosure would be contrary to the interests of the Executive Branch.

Napolitano appears to be correct.

He usually is...

 

[salem.hills]

What law prohibits Holder from handing over documents to Congress?

Many of the documents Issa wants pertain to on-going investigations.

What law prohibits Holder from handing over documents to Congress?

Right ^ the fantasy island law the liberal progressives (Communists) make up now. Or blame Bush somehow they are, like little kids.

 

[The T]

What law prohibits Holder from handing over documents to Congress?

Many of the documents Issa wants pertain to on-going investigations.

What law prohibits Holder from handing over documents to Congress?

Klop thinks Obama and Holder are above the law. They have every reasonable expectation for the delivery of the requested documents.

Too late now.

Obama and Holder are toast.

 

[Peach]

Many of the documents Issa wants pertain to on-going investigations.

What law prohibits Holder from handing over documents to Congress?

Klop thinks Obama and Holder are above the law. They have every reasonable expectation for the delivery of the requested documents.

Too late now.

Obama and Holder are toast.

I think it may help Obama, ONLY because so many Americans think any document may be 'classified'. This seems petty, and takes the focus off the economy; why republicans are veering away from the central issue, I do not understand.

 

[skookerasbil]

Napolitano has an opinion, and it is in error.

This is not the legal forum s0n...........last I checked its a POLITICS forum.


The only thing that matters is what shit sticks and with whom.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So the claim here is, the President can't invoke executive privilege unless he was personally involved?

So if you people insist he can't, you're conceding that he wasn't involved.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Napolitano has an opinion, and it is in error.

This is not the legal forum s0n...........last I checked its a POLITICS forum. The only thing that matters is what shit sticks and with whom.

Remind that you are . . . whom? What sticks is that Napolitano is wrong, and we will wait to see what Congress does.

 

[DiamondDave]

So the claim here is, the President can't invoke executive privilege unless he was personally involved?

So if you people insist he can't, you're conceding that he wasn't involved.

1) If he did, he's worried about something or has some involvement to some degree (that degree is unknown)
2) He chastised Bush about the very same thing
3) If he is not involved or does not have knowledge, this pretty much either shows him to be as dumb as a box of rocks or desperate in trying to save one of his cronies at any cost

 

[JakeStarkey]

1 does not matter
2 does not matter
3 may be so
4 depends on what Congress does: goes for a subpoena or for impeachment