<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Obama&#8217;s DOJ Wants to Protect Cheney From Political Embarrassment</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pubrecord.org/law/2623/obamas-wants-protect-cheney-political/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pubrecord.org/law/2623/obamas-wants-protect-cheney-political/?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=obamas-wants-protect-cheney-political</link>
	<description>Intrepid New Journalism</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 07:54:07 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: anonymously</title>
		<link>http://pubrecord.org/law/2623/obamas-wants-protect-cheney-political/comment-page-1/#comment-261</link>
		<dc:creator>anonymously</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Aug 2009 08:10:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pubrecord.org/?p=2623#comment-261</guid>
		<description>I have an old article for you to check out, regarding Richard Dick Cheney:
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2003/3021cheney_halli.html
5/3/03: &quot;Shouldnt Dick cheney be Impeached?&quot;
                 Halliburton Looter
by Scott Thompson, and  Michele Steinberg</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have an old article for you to check out, regarding Richard Dick Cheney:<br />
<a href="http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2003/3021cheney_halli.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2003/3021cheney_halli.html</a><br />
5/3/03: &#8220;Shouldnt Dick cheney be Impeached?&#8221;<br />
                 Halliburton Looter<br />
by Scott Thompson, and  Michele Steinberg</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: paul siemering</title>
		<link>http://pubrecord.org/law/2623/obamas-wants-protect-cheney-political/comment-page-1/#comment-44</link>
		<dc:creator>paul siemering</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2009 23:49:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pubrecord.org/?p=2623#comment-44</guid>
		<description>Let&#039;s hope you are right. when the vice president of the u.s. blows the cover of a cia operative, he&#039;s committed treason, and needs to be punished accordingly. Meaning he needs to be a lot more than &quot;embarrassed&quot;. he should be grateful he does not have to face a firing squad. some hard time in the slammer he has certainly earned.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Let&#8217;s hope you are right. when the vice president of the u.s. blows the cover of a cia operative, he&#8217;s committed treason, and needs to be punished accordingly. Meaning he needs to be a lot more than &#8220;embarrassed&#8221;. he should be grateful he does not have to face a firing squad. some hard time in the slammer he has certainly earned.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SP Biloxi</title>
		<link>http://pubrecord.org/law/2623/obamas-wants-protect-cheney-political/comment-page-1/#comment-32</link>
		<dc:creator>SP Biloxi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2009 05:52:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pubrecord.org/?p=2623#comment-32</guid>
		<description>There is alot more to the story from the Obama DOJ of claiming protection for Cheney from political embarrassment. While the much of the media is claiming that Obama is following the same pattern of Bush, from the Oversight Committee draft letter by then Chairman Henry Waxman, Bush DOJ, including then AG Mukasey would make Cheney FBI interview available. And it the same verbiage that Obama DOJ is using:


On June 24, 2008, the Justice Department informed the Committee by letter that it would not “provide or make available any reports of interviews with the President or the Vice President from the leak investigation.” The Department’s letter alluded to the “constitutional magnitude” of the “confidentiality interests” relating to these interview reports, and asserted that “communications of the President and the Vice President with their staffs relating to official Executive Branch activities lie at the absolute core of executive privilege.” The Justice Department also argued that providing the interviews to the Committee would undermine future law enforcement investigations, as future Presidents or Vice Presidents “might limit the scope of any voluntary interview or insist that they will only testify pursuant to a grand jury subpoena and subject to the protection of the grand jury secrecy provision.”

http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20081014104725.pdf


I don&#039; t think the Obama DOJ&#039;s claim will fly with Judge Sullivan as this the same judge that preside over the Ted Stevens case and was miffed over Mukasey for not handing over information for the Stevens case. As much as the AG Holder doesn&#039;t want any more pain and scandal to the DOJ [and the Bush DOJ played a major role in covering up in this case], Cheney will be exposed and this judge seemed to be fair. We shall see what his ruling will be.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is alot more to the story from the Obama DOJ of claiming protection for Cheney from political embarrassment. While the much of the media is claiming that Obama is following the same pattern of Bush, from the Oversight Committee draft letter by then Chairman Henry Waxman, Bush DOJ, including then AG Mukasey would make Cheney FBI interview available. And it the same verbiage that Obama DOJ is using:</p>
<p>On June 24, 2008, the Justice Department informed the Committee by letter that it would not “provide or make available any reports of interviews with the President or the Vice President from the leak investigation.” The Department’s letter alluded to the “constitutional magnitude” of the “confidentiality interests” relating to these interview reports, and asserted that “communications of the President and the Vice President with their staffs relating to official Executive Branch activities lie at the absolute core of executive privilege.” The Justice Department also argued that providing the interviews to the Committee would undermine future law enforcement investigations, as future Presidents or Vice Presidents “might limit the scope of any voluntary interview or insist that they will only testify pursuant to a grand jury subpoena and subject to the protection of the grand jury secrecy provision.”</p>
<p><a href="http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20081014104725.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20081014104725.pdf</a></p>
<p>I don&#8217; t think the Obama DOJ&#8217;s claim will fly with Judge Sullivan as this the same judge that preside over the Ted Stevens case and was miffed over Mukasey for not handing over information for the Stevens case. As much as the AG Holder doesn&#8217;t want any more pain and scandal to the DOJ [and the Bush DOJ played a major role in covering up in this case], Cheney will be exposed and this judge seemed to be fair. We shall see what his ruling will be.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
