Can she do that???Follow

Yes Smash. Executive privilege has everything to do with your balls itching...

You have no idea what it is beyond what you googled this morning. Feigning self righteous indignation at someone else equally misunderstanding it is just silly and pompous. Silly and painfully wrong is plenty, mate. No need to add pompous in there.

 
REQUEST FOR URGENT BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP 
 
FIRST, I MUST SOLICIT YOUR STRICTEST CONFIDENCE IN THIS TRANSACTION. THIS IS BY 
VIRTUE OF ITS NATURE AS BEING UTTERLY CONFIDENTIAL AND 'TOP SECRET'. I AM SURE 
AND HAVE CONFIDENCE OF YOUR ABILITY AND RELIABILITY TO PROSECUTE A TRANSACTION 
OF THIS GREAT MAGNITUDE INVOLVING A PENDING TRANSACTION REQUIRING MAXIIMUM 
CONFIDENCE. 
 
WE ARE TOP OFFICIAL OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTRACT REVIEW PANEL WHO ARE 
INTERESTED IN IMPORATION OF FUNDS INTO OUR COUNTRY WITH GOODS WHICH ARE 
PRESENTLY TRAPPED IN NIGERIA. IN ORDER TO COMMENCE THIS BUSINESS WE SOLICIT YOUR 
ASSISTANCE TO ENABLE US TRANSFER INTO YOUR ACCOUNT THE SAID TRAPPED GOODS. 
 
THE SOURCE OF THESE GOODS IS AS FOLLOWS; DURING THE LAST MILITARY REGIME HERE IN 
NIGERIA, THE GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS SET UP COMPANIES AND AWARDED THEMSELVES 
CONTRACTS WHICH WERE GROSSLY OVER-INVOICED IN VARIOUS MINISTRIES. THE PRESENT 
CIVILIAN GOVERNMENT SET UP A CONTRACT REVIEW PANEL AND WE HAVE IDENTIFIED A LOT 
OF URANIUM WHICH IS PRESENTLY FLOATING IN THE CENTRAL URANIUM DEPOSITORY OF 
NIGERIA READY FOR DELIVERY. 
 
HOWEVER, BY VIRTUE OF OUR POSITION AS CIVIL SERVANTS AND MEMBERS OF THIS PANEL, 
WE CANNOT ACQUIRE THIS URANIUM IN OUR NAMES. I HAVE THEREFORE, BEEN DELEGATED AS 
A MATTER OF TRUST BY MY COLLEAGUES OF THE PANEL TO LOOK FOR AN OVERSEAS PARTNER 
INTO WHOSE POSSESSION WE WOULD TRANSFER THE AMOUNT OF 13,000 KG(THIRTEEN 
THOUSAND KILOGRAMS). HENCE WE ARE WRITING YOU THIS LETTER. WE HAVE AGREED TO 
SHARE THE URANIUM THUS; 1. 20% FOR THE ACCOUNT OWNER 2. 70% FOR US (THE 
OFFICIALS) 3. 10% TO BE USED IN SETTLING TAXATION AND ALL LOCAL AND FOREIGN 
EXPENSES. IT IS FROM THE 70% THAT WE WISH TO COMMENCE THE IMPORTATION BUSINESS. 
 
PLEASE,NOTE THAT THIS TRANSACTION IS 100% SAFE AND WE HOPE TO COMMENCE THE 
TRANSFER LATEST SEVEN (7) BANKING DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THE RECEIPT OF THE 
FOLLOWING INFORMATIOM BY TEL/FAX; 234-1-7740449, YOUR COMPANY'S SIGNED, AND 
STAMPED LETTERHEAD PAPER THE ABOVE INFORMATION WILL ENABLE US WRITE LETTERS OF 
CLAIM AND JOB DESCRIPTION RESPECTIVELY. THIS WAY WE WILL USE YOUR COMPANY'S NAME 
TO APPLY FOR DELIVERY AND RE-AWARD THE CONTRACT IN YOUR COMPANY'S NAME. 
 
WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO DOING THIS BUSINESS WITH YOU AND SOLICIT YOUR 
CONFIDENTIALITY IN THIS TRANSATION. PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE THE RECEIPT OF THIS 
LETTER USING THE ABOVE TEL/FAX NUMBERS. I WILL SEND YOU DETAILED INFORMATION OF 
THIS PENDING PROJECT WHEN I HAVE HEARD FROM YOU. 
 
YOURS FAITHFULLY, 
 
DR CLEMENT OKON 
 
NOTE; PLEASE QUOTE THIS REFERENCE NUMBER (VE/S/09/99) IN ALL YOUR RESPONSES. 

Do I have it right?

[Edit: tried to edit it, browser fucked up.]

Edited, Apr 30th 2007 6:23pm by MDenham

It does indeed have to do with separation of powers. But you seem to keep confusing the priviledge itself with an assumption of motives. The privilege does not allow the executive branch to ignore rules, laws, etc. It has nothing at all to do with that except perhaps in some conspiracy theorists head.



Which had nothing at all to do with executive privilege.

You seem to think it has to do with executive "power". It does not. The executive branch does have the power to do certain things (like detain prisoners in a time of war for example, or deport people for example). Don't confuse that with executive privilege.



It is exclusively about subpeona and search warrange issues. Not usually. Always. It does have to do with separation of powers, but not in the concept that one branch does X and the other does Y. Rather executive privilege recognizes that different branches of the government gain their power differently and excersize that power differently and allows the executive branch to work with different "rules" then the legistlative branch.

Executive privilege prevents Congress from continually making public the internal workings of the Executive Branch. This is important because those two branches work differently. In the Legistlative branch, you have many people with the same amount of power. They all make proposals for various bits of legistlation, then use a process that decides which bits become law and which don't. That process is open because the legistlative process is open (mostly). Each individual in any given house of congress has the same voting power as any other, thus all are entitled to full disclosure of the legistlation they are voting on (for example).

The executive branch works completely differently. All but the president and VP are appointed, not elected. Also, not everyone has the same degree of power or "voice" in decisions that are made. Ultimately, all decisions rest with the President (but obviously he's not going to directly make every single one, hence the thousands of appointees).

Because of this structure its important that the process of decision making be "privileged" (private). Because the last thing a president needs is an entire branch of the government full of people afraid to suggest ideas for fear that their suggestions will become public knowledge. You need to allow for the "throw ideas against a wall and see what sticks" approach. Thus, memos, meetings, and discussions are not open to the public. The end choices are (mostly), but the process by which the decisions are made is *not* public.

It has nothing to do with the power of the branch, but the ability of the branch to make decisions without every step of the way being scrutinized. Because the recognition is that while the process *is* important in the legistlative branch (who voted for what, who wrote what, etc), it is not so much in the executive (only the president and VP are elected officials). The president ultimately is responsible for all decisions that are made. But only the *end* decision. He cannot and should not be held responsible for the process used to make those decisions. Cause otherwise, you're going to constantly be investgating which staffers said what in which meeting, and second guessing the meanings of statements out of the context they were made and otherwise making it impossible for any decisions to be made (more or less what the Left has been trying to do for years now anyway).


That is what executive privilege is, and why it exists. Again. It has *nothing* to do with what you keep babbling on about.




He didn't ignore any ruling of the court. The court in that case said that the legistlature had to write some rules for handling detainees (both foreigners and citizens). It did. The executive branch has abided by that legistlation. I'm not sure what exactly you think happened during all of this.



This has zero to do with executive privilege.

But for your edification: Hamdi claimed Saudi citizenship. It was not thrust upon him. He and his lawyers choose deportation. It was not forced upon him. Had he wished it, he most definately could have had a trial. He choose otherwise because odds are he'd have been tried for treason (armed fighting against US forces in a war zone) and executed. While I'm sure you'd love to assume that there was some evil conspiracy going on behind the scenes the reality is much much more straightforward then that.

And it had *nothing* to do with executive privilege, and certainly nothing to do with Ms. Rice and her decision.