WaPo has a piece today on former White House political director, Sara Taylor who testified this week in regards to the US Attorney firings: A Bush Aide’s Long Road From The White House
The following, at the end of the piece, struck me:
now she’s on several hooks. This week she found out the insurance will not cover her legal costs. Moreover, she’s restrained from fully telling her side of things, from moving on.“It’s a very difficult position to be in,” she said. “The president has exerted executive privilege and I have great respect for the president. The problem for you as an individual is that this comes at a huge personal cost financially.
Which goes along with a quote earlier in the piece:
Said friend and former White House communications director Nicolle Wallace: “I just feel like it’s incredibly unfair that she’s being caught in what’s really a struggle between Congress and the White House.”
Now, on the one hand, if one is involved in the government, one is ultimately responsible for what one does, so to make it into a wholly abstract struggle between branches misses the point: these entities are ultimately made up of people.
However, what is striking is the degree to which these situations do create a substantial burden on people who were functionaries who end up taking a substantial hit to their personal lives and finances in these situations. As the President and his advisers seek to block the Congress from acquiring information, the people who really get hurt are people are previously semi-anonymous personnel who may end up paying substantial costs because the President wishes to stonewall. Meanwhile, the President can simply ride out the remainder of his term and retire into comfort. While it is the President who is asserting executive privilege, it is Sara Taylor who has to pay the lawyers to deal with that fact (not to mention the general disruption of her life).
Now, some of these folks will get money from legal defense funds, but I suspect many will not. And, I will agree, many of them have reasons to not want to reveal what they know to protect themselves. However, it strikes me as problematic that this scenario makes human shields out of people who loyally worked in the administration because Alberto Gonzales can’t simply go to Capitol Hill and explain himself.
One could attempt to say that it is Congress’ fault for having these investigations in the first place, but I would counter that the Congress has every right to know why the administration engaged in the behaviors it did with the US Attorneys, as the behavior was wholly out of the norm (see the last two points). The public response from the administration has long been that there was nothing unusual about the actions. All well and good–but then why has it been so difficult for the AG to simply sit down and explain why that is the case?
The problem is, I think, that the administration simply doesn’t think it has an duty to explain itself to Congress. This is problematic because regardless of which party is in the majority, the Congress of the United States directly represents the people of the United States and when the President behaves as if he doesn’t owe the Congress an explanation he is, by extension, telling the citizenry that it doesn’t deserve to know either.
Technorati Tags: Sara M. Taylor, Alberto Gonzales, U.S. Attorneys
Sphere: Related Content
Dems are fishing for scandal when the firings are perfectly legal for whatever reasons. Even if, and it’s a big if, the firings were political in nature they are still legal. Leahy is trying to embarass the adminstration in whatever ways he can and he will step on little people like Sara Taylor to get it done.
The separation of powers allows the President to withhold prviledged information. I doubt Leahy will give up notes to all his staff meetings regarding the USA firings and he shouldn’t based upon the same principal.
This is a fight between the President and the Dems and has little to do with the American people. The congressional majority would do the people a favor by stopping this nonsense.
Comment by Steve Plunk — Thursday, July 12, 2024 @ 10:04 am
This is a fight between the President and the Dems and has little to do with the American people.
From my perspective, everything done in Washington is about the American people.
And, speaking as a citizen of the Republic, I except the President to be more forthcoming about these matter than he has.
And again: if it is such petty nonsense, why is it so blasted difficult for the administration to explain itself? Why is there even a need for executive privilege in this case? Why can’t the AG simply forthrightly answer questions about the way the DoJ works?
Surely if it is all nothing more than a Democratic witch hunt then the best strategy for the WH would be to tell the truth and embarrass the Dems for even asking the question in the first place.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Thursday, July 12, 2024 @ 10:09 am
Steve, you know I’ve been quite critical of the administration on this issue. Gonzales has been a fool who appears to not know how to run the Justice Department.
I don’t know how valid the executive privilege claims are. I suspect they have some validity since Fred Fielding is leading the charge and he’s respected in D.C. The U.S. Attorney story isn’t like Watergate because no laws have been broken. Democrats aren’t even accusing anyone of breaking laws.
Congress doesn’t have cart blanche on what they may ask the Executive Branch. We don’t have a right to know everything that happens. Transparency has costs. We’ve seen that in Congress with C-SPAN covering everything. Congressmen play more to the cameras. YouTube clips will cause even more changes.
I can’t read the minds of Fielding or the President. I don’t know if they think their concerns are legitimate or if they’re covering their asses–might even be both.
As for Taylor look closely at her pictures. Politics doesn’t let you age well. It wears you out. No wonder she left the White House. I’m as old as her. Put us side-by-side and you’d never guess it.
Comment by Sean Hackbarth — Thursday, July 12, 2024 @ 10:37 am
Because the charges wouldn’t stop. With the Democrats understanding that getting bills turned into law becomes difficult when the President can use the veto investigations become a more powerful political tool. Much like the GOP did during the Clinton years.
Comment by Sean Hackbarth — Thursday, July 12, 2024 @ 10:41 am
Congress doesn’t have cart blanche on what they may ask the Executive Branch.
I am not saying that they do. However, the default position of the administration has been to stonewall. I see nothing virtuous in that.
Further, I am no certain that executive privilege even applies in this case.
Because the charges wouldn’t stop.
Perhaps: but strategically speaking, the behavior of the WH has simply increased the ability of charges to be leveled.
And agreed on Taylor’s age–and as I noted in the post, I have some sympathy for her situation. Still, the President could alleviate some of that stress if he so chose, and he has not chosen to do so.
Comment by Dr. Steven Taylor — Thursday, July 12, 2024 @ 10:46 am