Executive Privilege: The Law and Politics

I want to explore the possibility of the White House using Executive Privilege in not testifying to the Congressional commitee. Jeralyn from Talk Left.com gives some good points as Senator Leahy wants to seek public testimony from the White House officials via subpoena:

Not surprisingly, the White House started to use the dread "E phrase":

Dan Bartlett, counselor to Mr. Bush, has said it is “highly unlikely” that the president would waive executive privilege to allow his top aides to testify publicly. One Republican strategist close to the White House, speaking on the condition of anonymity so as not to appear to be representing the administration [ASIDE: Huh? This is the most bogus basis for granting anonynmity I have ever read.], said: “No president is going to let their senior staff assistant to the president go testify. Forget that. They might agree to do an informal interview, but they’ll never testify.”

A matter of principle? Separation of powers? Try a matter of politics:

[A] report by the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service say[s] presidential advisers, including 47 from the Clinton administration alone, have frequently testified before Congressional committees, both while serving the president and after they had left the White House.

If the Clinton Administration have often testified to the Congressional committees when Clinton was in office and after Clinton left office without using Executive Privilege, the Bush Administration has given assurance to the American people that they are covering up their acts. The Clinton Administration has certainly come back to haunt Georgie...