[White House]

The Administration's Lovely Gifts.

Every now and again, I flash back to the weeks following the election last year and think about Bush and his "mandate." I recall with great pleasure the absurd, over-the-top triumphalism of the GOP, who, Mussolini-like, were talking about absolute power. Could that have been a year ago?

This reminiscence is brought to you by the Seussian-named judge, Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who is now gathering together other FISA judges to discuss what to do about Bush:

Presiding Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly, who also sits on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, told fellow FISA court members by e-mail Monday that she is arranging for them to convene in Washington, preferably early next month, for a secret briefing on the program, several judges confirmed yesterday....

The judges could, depending on their level of satisfaction with the answers, demand that the Justice Department produce proof that previous wiretaps were not tainted, according to government officials knowledgeable about the FISA court. Warrants obtained through secret surveillance could be thrown into question. One judge, speaking on the condition of anonymity, also said members could suggest disbanding the court in light of the president's suggestion that he has the power to bypass the court.

So the Congress wants investigations, the judiciary is considering taking their ball and leaving the playground, and even the press seems to have roused itself to ask a few tough questions.

Meanwhile, the White House reels. Here's a pretty amusing exchange in yesterday's press briefing with Scott McClellan. He wouldn't talk about spying, so the press hammered him on the Patriot Act:

Q So you would veto a three-month extension?

MR. McCLELLAN: I expressed our view last week; nothing has changed.

Q Can you tell me what that was again?

MR. McCLELLAN: You can see what I expressed last week. You know very well what it was.

Q Sounds like you're backing down from that.

MR. McCLELLAN: No, nothing has changed in terms of what I said last week.

Q So just say it. Just say --

Q Will you use the word "veto"? Why are you not using the word "veto"?

MR. McCLELLAN: I expressed our views on that last week --

Q But if you still stand by them, why won't you reiterate it?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, what I said last week still stands.

Q Which is what?

MR. McCLELLAN: I talked about a short-term extension. And Senator Frist has already said that there's not going to be a short-term extension of three months. And Speaker Hastert has already said it would be irresponsible to move with a short-term extension.

Poor Scotty. So inept, so flooded with unanswerable questions. Trying to defend the President's indefensible stand on the Patriot Act, McClellan claims all the Dems want to do is "weaken" the bill because "it's nothing but politics with the Democrats right now."

Q What political goal do they get by "weakening" the Patriot Act?

MR. McCLELLAN: I'm sorry?

Q What goal --

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, they've talked about some of the civil liberties in there. This law has found the right balance. It has saved lives and it has protected people's civil liberties. And there are some Democrats who are playing to certain special interests within their party that want to see authorities within this legislation killed. That's clearly what's happening here.

Q And those Republicans, the eight that Kelly mentioned, they're playing the same politics?

MR. McCLELLAN: Well, again, I'm not sure about the number eight; I know that there are few --

Q There are eight.

MR. McCLELLAN: I mean, I know that there are a few that had expressed their reservations about the bill....

Q You suggested that those who are seeking an extension are putting politics above security. That now includes eight Republicans. Are you including them in that accusation?

MR. McCLELLAN: No, it's the Senate Democrats.

You just couldn't ask for a nicer Christmas--holiday--than the one the nice folks at the White House are serving up, could you?