Executive Privilege

The Bush administration has claimed executive privilege in response to a subpoena request from the House Judiciary committee. Members of the House committee are seeking testimony about the CIA leak that revealed Valerie's Plame's covert standing. Attorney General Micheal Muskasy advised Bush to claim privilege, stating "I am greatly concerned about the chilling effect that compliance with the committee's subpoena would have on future White House deliberations and White House cooperation with future Justice Department investigations." But the precise point of this subpoena is to create a chilling effect. There is some indication that members of the Bush Administration revealed Plame's identity as retribution for public comments unfavorable to the Bush administration made by Plame's husband, Joe Wilson. If this is the case, the oversight role of Congress should do everything in its power to prevent such a scenario from happening again. In United States v. Nixon, the Supreme Court decision that affirmed the notion of executive privilege, the justices noted "the valid need for protection of communications between high Government officials and those who advise and assist them in the performance of their manifold duties." Political retaliation does not fall under the label of "performance of their manifold duties."
It is also worth noting that conservatives frequently assail the right to privacy as a made up right, not to be found in the Constitution. But executive privilege falls into the same category. Will there be an outcry from conservatives commentators over the Bush administration's loose interpretation of the Constitution?