One down, Two to go.

In a previous post, I asked three questions. The first was

Why then did the President need to resort to illegal wiretaps?

After all, as Colin Powell and I pointed out: "It didn’t seem to me, anyway, that it would have been that hard to go and get the warrants. And even in the case of an emergency, you go and do it [begin surveillance]. The law provides for that. And three days later, you let the court know what you have done, and deal with it that way.”.

Yesterday, we received the answer. "The whole key here is agility," according to Air Force Gen. Michael V. Hayden who was the NSA director when the surveillance began. According to a quote buried deep within a page one article in the Washington Post, Hayden said getting retroactive court approval is inefficient because it "involves marshaling arguments" and "looping paperwork around."

You got it! Two much paperwork is the justification for breaking the law. I expect that Bushies are next going to claim that this was their environmental program. No trees were harmed in the trampling of your rights!

There are still unanswered questions. But they all boil down to this: Does this Congress aim to sit by and let George Bush ignore the law, or will it do its Constitutional duties and impeach him? Talk to your Congressional delegation.

"... and tell 'em Big Mitch sent ya!"