Congress may cite Holder for contempt over claims of Executive Privilege.

[No Elephants]

Mind you, the claims of Executive Privilege are not over the original Fast and Furious mission itself, which began under the Bush administration (and continued under the Obama administration).

It is about an alleged cover up by the Obama administration.

The coverage of this by MSNBC this evening was hilarious.

Maddow tried to pretend, in her signature semi-incredulous semi-mocking manner, that the whole Holder flap was brought on by a Second Amendment rights blogger with a convoluted theory that Fast and Furious had something to do with the Obama administration's desire to discredit guns in general.

Come on, Maddow. We all know you are much, much smarter than that.

[No Elephants]

1. For those who may not know, Executive Privilege was once very narrow, until

Joe McCarthy got going.

Rather than deal with him directly, Eisenhower simply greatly expanded the scope of Executive Privilege unilaterally, to protect him as President and his favored folk from McCarthy, and to hell with everyone else.

Yet, Judge Sirica, an Eisenhower appointee, cut into the doctrine greatly when he ordered the Nixon White House to turn over its tapes of conversations Nixon held in the Oval Office.

Holder seeks to expand the claim well beyond any precedent because he has claimed that the Executive was was not involved in any of the communications, yet the claim of Executive Privilege should relieve the administration of any duty to turn over things for which Congress is asking.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_privilege

Remember when Obama promised us the most transparent administration ever?