Joe is right. You know there is blood in the water when the White House trots out Dan Bartlett to do their bidding at 7:15 AM. I watched him on CNN with Miles O'Brien, who did ask him about warrants, going to Congress, etc.
Bartlett basically said he can't talk about anything of substance (national security of course!) and lied his way through the rest. He said they consulted the "highest levels" of Congress and they approved of the program. (Certainly Jay Rockefeller didn't.) He said they are using FISA and everything is fine. (Then why are the FISA judges saying that they think that the program was used to illegitimately gain wiretapping warrants?)
And finally, here's where Miles and I have an issue. And every other journalist who talks to the Bush administration. The warrant question is great, and it's an important question to ask. However, there is a corollary (and simpler question) to the warrant question:
How is wiretapping without a court order NOT a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution?The Fourth Amendment is unambiguous:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.It's a clearly defined right, with the standard for violating that right, and an instruction set further confining the government's ability to violate that right by stating that the warrant must define ahead of time what is being searched or seized.
Fourth Amendment, United States Constitution
For strict constructionists, this one should be easy to answer. Why not ask him next time he's on?
Democrats can win on this one, but when Miles is asking Bartlett about McCain's meager critiques, you know the Democrats aren't taking the kind of lead they need to make this story move.
