Trump To Use Executive Privilege?

[carpedm9587]

And separation of powers means that the President can tell Congress to pound sand.

I have to wonder if you would have written this sentence when Obama was president.

I also think you are comparing apples to oranges. The "get lost" Tass is referring to (I think) is the constitutional power of Congress to impeach and convict a president, VP, or member of SCOTUS (to name a few). I'm not 100% sure, but I think they can even impeach and convict one of their own.

While the president can exert executive privilege, he's not a king. There are areas where he can tell Congress to "pound sand" and areas where he cannot.

Implied powers? Congress has the right to impeach, there is nothing saying that Trump Constitutionally must help the investigation.

No one accused under our system of government is required to help an investigation because we have the right to silence to prevent self-incrimination. But that right does not extend to impeding an investigation. So I may refuse to testify, but I cannot destroy evidence and I must produce evidence when it is explicitly cited in a subpoena or targeted in a search. I can resort to the courts to protect that information, but if both the courts and Congress say "provide it," then it must be provided. A president (or anyone else) also cannot legally use their power to undermine an investigation (e.g., promising or implying pardons for silence, ordering underlings to destroy evidence, etc.).

That is the essence of "balance of powers." To prevent any one branch from becoming overly powerful, they sometimes must bow to other branches - and they almost always have to bow when the other TWO branches speak in concert.

[seer]

While the president can exert executive privilege, he's not a king. There are areas where he can tell Congress to "pound sand" and areas where he cannot.

And those lines are not clearly drawn, Constitutionally. Never mind the fact that they have the Mueller report with the testimonies of the people in question. This is purely political Carp, and we all know it.

That is the essence of "balance of powers." To prevent any one branch from becoming overly powerful, they sometimes must bow to other branches - and they almost always have to bow when the other TWO branches speak in concert.

So what powers does the Executive branch have over Congress? Or is this a one way street? How is that balance?

[Mountain Man]

No one accused under our system of government is required to help an investigation because we have the right to silence to prevent self-incrimination. But that right does not extend to impeding an investigation. So I may refuse to testify, but I cannot destroy evidence and I must produce evidence when it is explicitly cited in a subpoena or targeted in a search. I can resort to the courts to protect that information, but if both the courts and Congress say "provide it," then it must be provided. A president (or anyone else) also cannot legally use their power to undermine an investigation (e.g., promising or implying pardons for silence, ordering underlings to destroy evidence, etc.).

And a president who invokes his Constitutional power of executive privilege can not be accused of or charged with undermining or obstructing an investigation.

[carpedm9587]

And those lines are not clearly drawn, Constitutionally. Never mind the fact that they have the Mueller report with the testimonies of the people in question. This is purely political Carp, and we all know it.

No, we don't "all" know it. I have no reason to see Mueller as a political animal. His entire history is of being very straight-laced and not for purchase. His comportment during this process says the same. I would have said the same of Comey, but the wheels came off that bus at the end of his career and in his post-career. As best I can tell, Mueller accepted a job, did it well, indicted many and passed off evidence for further investigation and indictments in several cases, and then provided a detailed report of the findings of the investigation.

And the Constitution is an architecture - not a blueprint.

So what powers does the Executive branch have over Congress? Or is this a one way street? How is that balance?

Are you kidding me? The executive has the power of the veto. The executive has the power of executive privilege. The executive has the power of appointment, without which Congress can do nothing for filing judicial, cabinet, and other vacancies. The executive includes the DOJ and the power of special counsel, which can be appointed to investigate any wrong-doing in any branch. Indeed, I am amazed Trump has not yet thought to request special counsel to investigate some of the people he keeps lambasting in his tweets. The executive has the power of executive order, and declaring national emergencies.

The executive, as Rogue pointed out, has been accumulating power presidency after presidency since at least the first world war.

[carpedm9587]

And a president who invokes his Constitutional power of executive privilege can not be accused of or charged with undermining or obstructing an investigation.

Your statement is too absolute (as usual). It depends on what he is lumping under "executive privilege."

[seer]

No, we don't "all" know it. I have no reason to see Mueller as a political animal. His entire history is of being very straight-laced and not for purchase. His comportment during this process says the same. I would have said the same of Comey, but the wheels came off that bus at the end of his career and in his post-career. As best I can tell, Mueller accepted a job, did it well, indicted many and passed off evidence for further investigation and indictments in several cases, and then provided a detailed report of the findings of the investigation.

No, Carp I don't see what Congress is going to get out of these witnesses that Mueller didn't. It is all about keeping the political theater going until the next election, nothing more.

And the Constitution is an architecture - not a blueprint.

Who says? And yes you have the amendment process as part of the blueprint.

Are you kidding me? The executive has the power of the veto. The executive has the power of executive privilege. The executive has the power of appointment, without which Congress can do nothing for filing judicial, cabinet, and other vacancies. The executive includes the DOJ and the power of special counsel, which can be appointed to investigate any wrong-doing in any branch. Indeed, I am amazed Trump has not yet thought to request special counsel to investigate some of the people he keeps lambasting in his tweets. The executive has the power of executive order, and declaring national emergencies.

That is true the DOJ can investigate wrong doing in Congress, but that is not determined by the President. The bottom line is that Congress can investigate the President, he can not investigate the Congress.

The executive, as Rogue pointed out, has been accumulating power presidency after presidency since at least the first world war.

Really, did you see what Lincoln and Jackson did? They often ignored the court.

[JimL]

That is correct, and the Executive Branch has its powers and special responsibilities too. Including resisting a political fishing expedition by the Legislative Branch. It is called a separation of powers. And where does the Constitution say that the Legislative Branch has oversight over the Executive Branch? Please be specific.

The president doesn't get to decide what is and what isn't a political fishing expedition and to therefore hide it from the American people. What is telling to me is that like the president, you Trumpsters are afraid to see the facts. What are you worried about? If you are so worried about the facts going public, about to much transparency, then you know, or at least strongly suspect, the presidents guilt, and are yourselves being complicit.

[seer]

The president doesn't get to decide what is and what isn't a political fishing expedition and to therefore hide it from the American people. What is telling to me is that like the president, you Trumpsters are afraid to see the facts. What are you worried about? If you are so worried about the facts going public, about to much transparency, then you know, or at least strongly suspect, the presidents guilt, and are yourselves being complicit.

We know the facts (see the Mueller report which you said you would accept) and yes Jim he does get to assert Executive Privilege. Let the courts figure it out, and that will take us well beyond the next election cycle. If the people don't want Trump they will elect someone else. And as far as transparency Trump could have asserted Executive Privilege during the Mueller investigation, he didn't, Mueller had full access to his staff.

[rogue06]

The president doesn't get to decide what is and what isn't a political fishing expedition and to therefore hide it from the American people. What is telling to me is that like the president, you Trumpsters are afraid to see the facts. What are you worried about? If you are so worried about the facts going public, about to much transparency, then you know, or at least strongly suspect, the presidents guilt, and are yourselves being complicit.

Still incapable of showing where in the Constitution it says that the Legislative Branch has oversight over the Executive Branch so you have nothing left but to try to divert attention away from your continued failure with attempts to distract and deflect.


Fail better.

[rogue06]

We know the facts (see the Mueller report which you said you would accept) and yes Jim he does get to assert Executive Privilege. Let the courts figure it out, and that will take us well beyond the next election cycle. If the people don't want Trump they will elect someone else. And as far as transparency Trump could have asserted Executive Privilege during the Mueller investigation, he didn't, Mueller had full access to his staff.

And every single document they requested. They didn't play the usual political game of "we gave you hundreds of thousands of documents so you should be happy now," always leaving out the fact that they refused to turn over the ones actually requested and instead just dumped a load of irrelevant rubbish.

Complete and unfettered access to documents and personnel. That was why in his report Mueller clearly stated that Trump never actually interfered with his investigation.

[Mountain Man]

Your statement is too absolute (as usual). It depends on what he is lumping under "executive privilege."

Nope. An action is either executive privilege, or it isn't. If Trump claims executive privilege when he shouldn't then that's another matter.

[JimL]

We know the facts (see the Mueller report which you said you would accept) and yes Jim he does get to assert Executive Privilege. Let the courts figure it out, and that will take us well beyond the next election cycle. If the people don't want Trump they will elect someone else. And as far as transparency Trump could have asserted Executive Privilege during the Mueller investigation, he didn't, Mueller had full access to his staff.

Wrong seer, Trump can not use executive priviledge in order to obstruct an investigation into himself or his administration anymore than any other alledged criminal can obstruct an investigation. Trump knows that, which is why he tried to get his underlings to do it for him. Fortunately for him, they knew it would be illegal obstruction as well and so all refused to do it. The American people, including you, will have a better idea of what Trump has been up to after Congress gets the full report and hears from the witnesses themselves which is what Trump is worried about. What I'd like to know, is what you Trumpsters are afraid of?

[JimL]

Still incapable of showing where in the Constitution it says that the Legislative Branch has oversight over the Executive Branch so you have nothing left but to try to divert attention away from your continued failure with attempts to distract and deflect.


Fail better.

It is implied in the Constitution since the Congress is given many powers, including the power to impeach which it could not do without the power to investigate and have access to the relevant documents and witnesses. What's wrong with you, what do you want, a King?

[JimL]

And every single document they requested. They didn't play the usual political game of "we gave you hundreds of thousands of documents so you should be happy now," always leaving out the fact that they refused to turn over the ones actually requested and instead just dumped a load of irrelevant rubbish.

Complete and unfettered access to documents and personnel. That was why in his report Mueller clearly stated that Trump never actually interfered with his investigation.

Mueller clearly stated, Mueller clearly stated. NOT! What is clear in the report, as well as in your face, is that Trump obstructed and attempted to obstruct many times over. He doing it now you dope, by asserting executive priviledge in order to prevent you from hearing fully what the witnesses have to say in answer to a Congressional hearing. How dumb can you get?

[JimL]

Nope. An action is either executive privilege, or it isn't. If Trump claims executive privilege when he shouldn't then that's another matter.

That's correct, and he can't claim executive priviledge in order to obstruct Congressional oversight into his administration.