#TrumpRussia ‘s executive privilege … anticipating a “national security” defense by POTUS45*


By ann summers
“…what happens if the Federal Bureau of Investigation finds evidence of criminal conduct by the president? Or, perhaps more likely in Trump’s case, what happens if the president tries to shut down FBI investigations into his commercial activities involving Russia, or into the actions of cronies like Manafort?”

There could be that moment where information vital to impeach / indict Agent Orange could become a matter of national security … ironically because of Russia. Whenever that “wag the dog”moment occurs, probably after May (colleges being on break), we will return to the GWOT and Great Leader will abide no “national security” leaks, just as news blackouts have been hinted or at least made selective, however clumsy.

More likely should be other alternatives, but the Muslim-ban, among other EOs, has already given us a surreal approach to governance. And thwarting a criminal investigation by labeling prosecutors, traitors, is not out of the realm of trying to escape the greatest constitutional crisis since Watergate.

After all, who could have even imagined a “President Trump” despite the residue of an electorate with a passing familiarity with Manchurian Candidate narratives, even as they have had a resurgence in a number of media entertainment narratives. Using Pirro as a surrogate to attack Ryan is symptomatic of some piglet-fisted tactics from the Oval Office.


The privilege that allows the president and other high officials of the executive branch to keep certain communications private if disclosing those communications would disrupt the functions or decision-making processes of the executive branch.

As demonstrated by the Watergate hearings, this privilege does not extend to information germane to a criminal investigation.

(1990) Reagan’s lawyers for the first time in the Iran-Contra affair asserted executive privilege in an effort to protect his diaries from disclosure,

Ronald Reagan waived all executive privilege at the start of the Iran-contra investigation, which arguably dealt with the very matters of national security and diplomacy in which executive privilege is most legitimate.

Of course, trying to hold PBO to a BATFE failure in order to score anti-gun control points is as strange as legal maneuvering gets, but we will enter uncharted territory depending whether the GOP decides to defect from Lord Dampnut.

Congress is handicapped in providing oversight of the president and executive branch, as legislative committees frequently appeal to the federal courts to get access to information…

The evolution of executive privilege in practice and in law has supported the basic principle that it must be asserted directly by the president himself or by high-level executive branch officers at the direction of the president.

In either instance, a rationale for the claim of executive privilege has been the norm. Furthermore, in the balancing test between the president’s claimed need for secrecy and Congress’s request for information, the presumption is in favor of openness without a clear rationale by the president….

But based on the Fast and Furious case, the outcome of such judicial appeals does not look good for Congress or for government openness

We now seem to be at the point where a president does not have to make a formal declaration of executive privilege for information not connected to the White House to be walled off from congressional oversight.



This entry was posted in 2016 Election, Congress, Conspiracy, Fascists/Corporatists, Federal Courts, Government, History, Jurisprudence, Media, Organized Crime, Political Science, Politics, Presidential Elections, Propaganda, Russia, Society, Treason, United States, War, War on "Terror" and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to #TrumpRussia ‘s executive privilege … anticipating a “national security” defense by POTUS45*

  1. It is probably safe to say that hearings in the House are so hopelessly compromised, we can forget them. Nunes has no say in the Senate. The Senate will have hearings, Yates will testify.

    More worrisome is the Koch funded effort to have a Constitutional Convention. If that succeeds, our founding document may be rewritten so that it is no longer recognizable. Our entire government structure could be changed.

    In other news, the body count is now at 11 if the news reports are correct.

    • ann summers says:

      more amusing is Palmer disambiguating the WWE inference ….
      ***The latest prominent dead Russian, Nikolai Volkov, is not to be confused with Yugoslavian-born Josip Peruzović, who performed as a popular pro wrestler in the United States under the fictional stage name “Nikolai Volkoff.” You can read more details about the real Volkov’s reported murder from Radio Free Europe (link). We’ve also previously published a roundup of the first nine prominent Russians who have died during Trump-Russia (link). Voronenkov was the tenth, and Volkov is apparently the eleventh. Contribute to Palmer Report***

  2. Terry Welshans says:

    And the beat goes on…..

    Lots of “what if”s in my brain right now.

    What if *45 fires Comey?
    What if *45 pardons all concerned, even before they are tried?
    What if *45 uses “Executive Privilege”?
    What if neither house or senate investigate?
    What if there is no special prosecutor established?
    What if Executive and Legislative branches do nothing?

  3. rafflaw says:

    I keep wondering who is going to be the new Deep Throat?

  4. That’s a nice Legislative and Judicial Branch you’ve got there . . .

    “Comedy is truth, only faster.” – Gilda Radner

  5. Terry Welshans says:

    The parrot is dead, I say!

  6. A few days ago Louise Mensch responded to a question about what happens if Trump gives Julian Assange a preemptive full pardon. Her response was to the effect that the Ecuadorian embassy is completely surrounded by England.

    That was worth a spew of coffee.

Comments are closed.