Can a president simply claim executive privilege to stop investigations of any purported wrongdoings by him?

Question

or his administration? is that the way its supposed to work?

So ...lets say some future president is accused of say...using the justice department for political harassment of opponents, and congress wants to investigate the matter, can the president just say..."executive privilege" and thats kills the investigation? and what if some future president is being investigated for ordering law breaking by his administration? when congress calls his subordinates to ask them who ordered them to do the deeds, can the future president just tell congress "executive privilege" and that kills the investigation?

is that the way things are supposed to work in the United States????

Answer 1

Not neccesarily.  As history had shown, Executive Privelige is commonly defined by the Congress.  When Richard Nixon claimed E.P. to block any connection to Watergate, the Congress overturned this claim.  Ultimately, The House has the power to interpret what is Exec. Privilege and what isn't,

Answer 2

No, to keep his private conversations with cabinet and advisors private.

Answer 3

As far as I can see there is no need for a new investigation. The current president cooperated with the special prosecutor (unlike the previous one) So why are we seeing a new stir in congress. look to me like the Democrats want to take our minds off  the fact that since they took over we have had skyrocketing fuel prices and a housing crisis.

Answer 4

this one seems to think so...

Answer 5

No I can't understand why they have let him get away with it. They have all trampled the Constitution.

Answer 6

no man is above the law

Answer 7

Regardless if he can or not...Bush just did it today. Just goes to show you that he's hiding something. Presidents have always felt they've been above the law, they can pardon criminals so they don't serve any jail time. Two most crooked pardons...Richard Nixon (Ford) and Scooter Libby.

Answer 8

He cannot use Executive Privilege to block or hinder a criminal investigation.

Nixon and Clinton both tried to use Executive Privilege to hinder criminal investigations,

And the Federal Courts, over ruled both of them.

.........................................

But the President is well within his rights, to use Executive Privilege to prevent Congress from accessing private White House records, that do not pertain to a criminal investigation.

Separation of powers, prevents Congress from going on fishing trips, demanding White House records or advise given to the president. Just to see if they can find anything amiss.

.........................................

In the case of the Attorney firings or the CIA leak case.

There are no alligations that a crimes was committed

Congress is just fishing, hoping to find something to embarass the President.

Answer 9

Yes he can, and that is why he is doing it.  

Well it was not always that way, but since the PNAC selected little georgie bush, that's the way things are.

Answer 10

Absolutely not !!

It's crazy what people think the President can get away with.  Executive privilege is just that... a privilege.  There is NOTHING in the constitution that says he can do that.  It is an acknowledgment by Congress that sometimes the Prez has to do stuff behind their backs for the moment for national security.  But almost always, they comply with Congress after the fact.  Also, most presidents in history rarely used such a dangerous, powerful, and slippery tool .... each one could count the number of times used on one hand.  Bushie has done it 14 times, and never complied later like he was expected to.

Congress can easily tell him "no" but they are scared of losing the majority (Dems hold it by a slight amount) in Congress until we get a new president.  Also, we've been conditioned lately to believe that the President it the foremost authority in the USA.  He is not, he answers to congress if they weren't being such wusses right now.  

To demonstrate the power of congress,  we impeached Clinton because the Republicans had a 2/3rds majority at the time and pushed it thru even when most voters didn't really want it.  We don't impeach Bushie because the Dems only have a slight majority instead of a 2/3rds and they know the other Repubs won't let it happen.  

They are scared of looking bad for raising a stink when they know nothing will come of it.  The are being chickensh_ts.