White House Claims Executive Privilege in Social Secretary Desirée Rogers Decision Not to Appear on Capitol Hill over the Salahis Party Crashing

UPDATE#1: 11:42 A.M. -- The agents who let Tareq and Michaele Salahi through the White House checkpoint at last week's state dinner have been placed on administrative leave and might be fired, according to Secret Service chief Mark Sullivan.

Executive privilege for President Obama's Social Secretary Desirée Rogers? Hmmm. It's starting to look a lot like George W. Bush's administration. The White House announced on December 1, that Ms. Rogers, a close friend of both President Obama and his wife, would not be testifying to Congress Thursday about the two reality-television aspirants, Tareq and Michaele Salahi, who got by the Secret Service at a recent state dinner to shake hands with President Obama. Besides having egg on their face, what is the real reason why they don't want Ms. Rogers to appear on Capitol Hill? They didn't have a problem throwing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Gates on the "lions den" yesterday to make a case for sending more troops to Afghanistan.

"I think you know that based on separation of powers, staff here don't go to testify in front of Congress," said press secretary Robert Gibbs in his daily briefing. "She will not be testifying in front of Congress tomorrow." Really? Other than the obvious embarassment to the White House, how can they justify her not testifying based on executive privilege? Seems like Christmas has come really early for the Salahis and they will be on the receiving end of some monetary gifts from the media.

The sad reality is that the decision of the White House will likely not be contested by Democrats on the House Homeland Security Committee, essentially saving Rogers from a potentially embarrassing turn in the hearing-room spotlight. Since Rogers was only invited, not subpoenaed, to testify by the ranking Republican on the committee, New York Representative Pete King, she faces no legal consequences for declining to attend. Whatever happened to the transparency that President Obama promised on the campaign trail?

In my opinion, Gibbs' justification for Ms. Rogers' absence on the basis of a separation of powers has raised eyebrows. It's laughable that they invoked Executive privilege with regards to a social secretary arranging a party. Is it me or is this just really inane?

Photo credit:  Desirée Rogers, Brendan Smialowski / Getty