The first news piece of 2006 that qualifies for the Judith Miller Award for Bringing Shame on the Profession of Journalism is from Newsweek.

What can possibly be the explanation for Newsweek's story which makes excuse after excuse for Bush's lawbreaking in the domestic spying matter?

Here's an example:

The message to White House lawyers from their commander in chief, recalls one who was deeply involved at the time, was clear enough: find a way to exercise the full panoply of powers granted the president by Congress and the Constitution. If that meant pushing the boundaries of the law, so be it. The Bush administration did not throw away the Bill of Rights in the months and years that followed; indeed, NEWSWEEK has learned, ferocious behind-the-scenes infighting stalled for a time the administration's ambitious program of electronic spying on U.S. citizens at home and abroad.

Today's NY Times reports that even John Ashcroft may have had concerns about Bush's domestic spying plans.

Just how bad does something have to be before John Ashcroft would object?  In my experience, pretty bad.

As long as he is the one wielding the power, he thing it's a pretty wonderful thing.  So this operation had to be pretty flagrantly extra-legal for him to raise a concern. 

The Miami Herald carries this thought provoking piece from Robert Steinback:

Bush would have us excuse his administration's excesses in deference to the ''war on terror'' -- a war, it should be pointed out, that can never end. Terrorism is a tactic, an eventuality, not an opposition army or rogue nation. If we caught every person guilty of a terrorist act, we still wouldn't know where tomorrow's first-time terrorist will strike. Fighting terrorism is a bit like fighting infection -- even when it's beaten, you must continue the fight or it will strike again.

The right wing is in full propaganda mode to try to muddle the fact on Bush's domestic spying scandal.

Think Progress has some important info to help debunk the latest right wing lies.