From: "Rich Gauszka" 

Forgot to add this one comment from the muckraker site

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003033.php
OK - lemme see if I can get this straight:

Congress: we want to see your emails

White House: no, executive privelege

C: we see that some emails were RNC

WH: that was to avoid the Hatch Act, so people could do political, non-govt work

C: OK, then let's see the RNC emails

WH: no, there "exists a clear and indisputable Executive Branch interest"

Do I have that straight?



"Rich Gauszka"  wrote in
message news:4626732e$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> The White House is claming 'executive privilege'  for RNC emails.  They
> tried to have it both ways with the emails and they got caught - now they
> have to go with the 'executive privilege' ploy.
>
> http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003033.php
>
> And today, in a letter to the RNC, the White House made their position
> clear: you have to give them to us first. There "exists a clear and
> indisputable Executive Branch interest" in the emails on the RNC-issued
> accounts, wrote Emmet Flood, Special Counsel to the President.
>
> "John Cuccia"  wrote in message
> news:odrc23tadnebrfgbpmut2t33tam6lrg8at{at}4ax.com...
>> They weren't losing White House emails.  They were losing RNC emails,
>> which they were using  for official business to cirmcumvent the law.
>>
>> Now they have the nerve to claim that said RNC email protected by
>> executive privilege.  The Bushies continue to exhibit themselves to be
>> liars, thieves, and blackguards, to a man.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 18 Apr 2007 10:31:26 -0400, "Rich Gauszka"
>>  wrote:
>>
>>>They probably were too busy 'losing' White House emails
>>>
>>>"Mike N."  wrote in message
>>>news:0n0c2357m46tva0ceomnrt1fp02kidvu55{at}4ax.com...
>>>> http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=3012688
>>>>
>>>> "It was a simple letter, just more than 100 words on
two pieces of
>>>> paper.
>>>>
>>>> But this singular document became one of the key pieces of evidence,
>>>> the
>>>> smoking gun, touted by the Bush administration to justify
the invasion
>>>> of
>>>> Iraq. It's also the same piece of "evidence"
that led to a perjury
>>>> conviction for Vice President Dick Cheney's former top
aide, I. Lewis
>>>> Libby.
>>>>
>>>> The July 2000 letter, which was obtained from Italian intelligence
>>>> services, appeared to be an official correspondence from the Niger
>>>> government to the president of Iraq, confirming a deal to
sell 500 tons
>>>> of
>>>> pure uranium to Iraq annually.
>>>>
>>>> But if the CIA had done a simple Internet search on some
of the terms
>>>> used
>>>> in the letter, the agency would have quickly learned that it was a
>>>> forgery.
>>>>
>>>> Instead, the letter was later cited by President Bush in
his 2003 State
>>>> of
>>>> the Union address as proof that Saddam Hussein was
determined to build
>>>> nuclear weapons, justifying a preemptive invasion of the
country. "
>>>
>
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5