DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**onlyfun_biziness** · 06-23-2012, 08:23 PM

To now properly assert executive priveldge means presidential involvement did indeed occur and thus implies perjury from Holder.

I'm curious, please explain something to me: Considering the operation ended in January 2011 and the Executive Order applies to documents post February 2011, how exactly do they show White House involvement?

06-23-2012, 08:23 PM	#24
onlyfun_biziness Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 558 Senior Member	To now properly assert executive priveldge means presidential involvement did indeed occur and thus implies perjury from Holder. I'm curious, please explain something to me: Considering the operation ended in January 2011 and the Executive Order applies to documents post February 2011, how exactly do they show White House involvement?
	Quote