In the White House Press briefing that just concluded, press secretary Tony Snow said that he was not aware of the president being briefed on the US Attorney issue. He further said the president did not sign off on the firings.
CNN's Ed Henry hit the nail on the head: if no conversations occurred with the president, and no advice was given, then how can the White House assert executive privilege, claiming the need to shield presidential advice?
Tony Snow's response: "That's an intriguing question."
Darn straight it's an intriguing question! What the heck are they protecting if there exists no presidential advice on the issue? I'll tell you what they are protecting: Karl Rove and Harriet Miers, two of the President's most loyal and trusted advisers.
Snow further stated the true purpose of the White House's actions: to prevent a public 'spectacle' of a public hearing. Well, Mr. Press Secretary, you all have made your bed and it's time to lie in it.
This stinks to high Hell.
Further, on the O'Reilly Factor last night, guest Judge Andrew Napolitano clearly stated that legal precedent is that Executive Privilege applies only in the area of national security issues. For a court to change that precedent would be a major shift in judicial philosophy.
The issue of executive privilege is now dead in the water. There is no circumstance under which there is a reasonable argument for Rove, Miers, et. al to not testify under oath in a public hearing before Congress.
Cross Posted at News for the Left
