Right....

[pecunium]

Lets see.

Executive Privelege is supposed to ensure they president gets free and unfettered advice; by making sure that such deliberations/bull sessions/investigations of things which; out of context, might look worse than they are, perhaps even criminal.

Under Clinton the question of Executive Privelege extending to what Secret Service agents in the president's protection detail was ruled to not exisit. I thought this was bad; because it meant some thing which should be privileged, lose that privilege, by virtue of the need to protect the president.

So the House has issued subpoenas to Harriet Meiers and Sara Taylor, to answer questions about the firing of US Attorneys.

Bush has said, more than once, he was never in the loop on the firing of US Attorneys. To hear the lack of recollection, Gonzales was never in the loop either.

So they can't have talked to Bush about it.

But Bush has invoked Executive Privilege. He, in others words, is either trying the Nixonian tactic of arguing anything which happens in the White House is protected (which didn't work last time), or is admitting he was involved.

Comments

[sinboy.livejournal.com]

So Congress nabs all Secret Service agents who were within earshot of any conversations when the people in question were consulting with Bush.