For those of you interested in the US constitution, we’ve got a special report coming up later this morning on Rep. Don Young’s (R-AK) plot to overthrow the constitution. Find out more about his insidious plans and what he’s already done.

We’ve known for a while that the administration briefed the so-called Gang of Eight on the warrantless wiretap program back in 2004. That Gang is composed of the both parties’ senior leaders in each house as well as both parties’ senior leaders in each house’s intelligence committee.

But the day after the notorious Ashcroft hospital room showdown, the White House gave a special briefing to then-Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX).

Okay, so here we are. For two centuries or more, once a bill passes Congress, only Congress can change it. The president can veto it or not. The Supreme Court can rule a law unconstitutional. But that’s it.

But it turns out that back in 2005, to guarantee an earmark payoff to one of his political contributors, Rep. Don Young (R-AK) actually went in and rewrote the text of a transportation spending bill after the thing had been passed by Congress and it was waiting to be signed by the president.

We explain what happened in today’s episode of TPMtv …

(ed.note: There was a case back a couple years ago when a bill went through Congress but a transcription error led to the bill appearing with slightly different text in the House and Senate versions. Frist and Hastert got together and decided to send the House version on to the president since that was what the conference committee agreed to. A court has since ruled the judiciary won’t second-guess this decision. That, I would say, is pretty iffy itself. But at least the leaders of both bodies speak in some fashion for each House. And it was basically setting right a technical error. So even though it was pretty bad, it’s simply not comparable to one member — with no standing — sneaking a new pay-off into the bill after final passage through Congress.)

Yesterday in South Carolina, Rudy Giuliani promised he could and would “end illegal immigration.” But we got video of him back in 1996 saying that’s just not possible and you’ve just got to accept that.

It’s a pretty big flip-flop. But it’s also a pretty good example of a case where the problem isn’t what Rudy said ten years ago, it’s what he’s saying today.

If you look at what he said up at the Kennedy School ten years ago, it’s eminently reasonable and even eloquent. He says that you simply cannot completely control immigration in this country if you want to have the kind of America we have now, which is to say, an America which is not a police state. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t have an immigration policy. You should. But with borders as big as ours, a population as diverse as ours and civil liberties as robust as ours it’s just not possible to put an end to illegal immigration. Not to mention the fact that you’d create pretty massive dislocations in the service economy.

What’s completely ridiculous is what Rudy’s saying now.

New “Gays for Giuliani” pseudo-ad to actually hit the airwaves in South Carolina. That and other political news of the day in today’s Election Central Happy Hour Roundup.

This weekend we learned that Gen. Petraeus’ Report will actually be written by the White House. Now it turns out that the White House is pushing to have the general’s increasingly nominal report delivered by Condi Rice and Bob Gates, with Petraeus relegated to a “private congressional briefing.”

The Democrats on the Hill appear to be saying, No, this isn’t going to be like a has-been 60s band touring under its founders name twenty years after the guy dropped out and went to live in an Ashram. We actually want to hear from Gen. Petraeus.

And the oddest part of the article in the Post reporting this is that the authors claim, “The skirmishing is an indication of the rising anxiety on all sides in the remaining few weeks before the presentation of what is widely considered a make-or-break assessment of Bush’s war strategy.” (emphasis added)

Perhaps I’m missing something. But doesn’t this sound like the anxiety is a little more pronounced on the White House side since they’re the ones trying to bag on the report that has been the building focus of our Iraq policy for months now?

A panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals all but laughs at the Justice Department’s pleas to throw warrantless-surveillance lawsuits out of court.

Dem Presidential candidates go on the attack — against China. That and other political news of the day in today’s Election Central Morning Roundup.

You know that Mitt Romney is a huge phony. What’s more concrete and troubling is that he seems remarkably ignorant of anything beyond America’s shores. His new kick is demanding an apology from Barack Obama for saying something that the President of Afghanistan, the Ambassador from Afghanistan, US Commanders on the ground in Afghanistan and even President Bush thinks is true. Learn about Mitt’s unparalleled ignorance in today’s episode of TPMtv …

Fred Kaplan offers a comprehensive analysis of Rudy’s ridiculous Foreign Affairs article.