The White House brushed aside five congressional subpoenas Thursday, saying executive-branch documents and communications regarding the firing of several U.S. attorneys are protected by executive privilege.

Leahy expressed outrage with the White House response.

“Increasingly, the president and vice president feel they are above the law,” he said. “In America no one is above the law.”

Fielding declared that subpoenas for internal White House documents, communications by White House officials with those outside the executive branch, and communications between White House officials and the Department of Justice (DoJ) need not be complied with because they are protected under executive privilege. In addition, he said that lawyers for the former White House

director of political affairs Sara Taylor and former White House counsel Harriet Miers have been advised to tell their clients to also not turn over documents.

“The reasons for these distinctions rests upon a bedrock presidential prerogative: For the president to perform his constitutional duties, it is imperative that he receive candid and unfettered advice and that free and open discussions and deliberations occur among his advisers ... and others within and outside the executive branch,” Fielding wrote.

The administration also released a letter from Solicitor General and Acting Attorney General Paul Clement stating that it is his “considered legal judgment that” the president “may assert executive privilege over the subpoenaed documents and testimony.”

Conyers was quick to express his disappointment and outrage with the president’s decision, saying the assertion of executive privilege “is unprecedented in its breadth and scope.”

“The president’s response to our subpoena shows an appalling disregard for the right of the people to know what is going on in their government,” Conyers said. “This response indicates the reckless disrespect this administration has for the rule of law.”

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), a member of the Judiciary Committee, also expressed his dissatisfaction.

“The President seems to be saying: ‘How can I stonewall? Let me count the ways,’” he said. “Not since the Nixon administration have we seen a stonewalling strategy like this. I have no doubt it will backfire and it will not stand.”

A senior administration official maintained Thursday that the White House is “confident that our [legal] position is sound” and that it would hold up in court. The official also expressed disappointment that the situation has progressed to this point.

“We regret that we’re forced to take this step. We had very much hoped that accommodation could be reached and this could be avoided,” the official said.

But Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Commercial and Administrative Law, blasted the White House for failing to cooperate with the investigation.

“The fact is that the Bush administration, which has publicly declared its commitment to getting the truth on this issue, has stonewalled from the beginning,” she said.

Sanchez also criticized the administration’s offer to let officials testify behind closed doors and without transcript.

“Mr. Fielding should understand two things: that nobody in their right mind would accept a White House offer that would condone perjury, and that saying 'take it or leave it' for months is not actually negotiation.”

Without indicating what his next step will be, Conyers hinted that he will escalate the pressure on the White House by enforcing the subpoenas.

“At this point, I see only one choice in moving forward, and that is to enforce the rule of law set forth in these subpoenas,” he said.