I just read a article on huffpo, just posted 20 minutes ago. I did not watch Gibb's press briefing and am listening to it now.
Are Obama administration lawyers working on bending the intent of the law?
Are your rights as a citizen to a Miranda warning a matter of interpretation by a president, or to be legislated away?
Gibbs stated today that the president is still committed to the law establishing Miranda rights. BUT the president wants protections of Miranda, as well as flexibility.
What is flexible about this law? When a president decides?
All too much reminding us of the Bush regime as their total disregard of of our constitution. Their issuing of memos to circumvent our laws. Will the White House have memos provided by the DOJ to prevent Miranda warnings, when they deem necessary?
The case Dickerson v. U.S., already limits Congress's ability to alter the content and power of the Miranda warning (which is a constitutional right, the court determined).
Gibbs said, "the president is "interested" in "limited flexibility" with respect to laws governing how to question a suspected terrorist. This means granting interrogators, under controlled and moderated environments, the right to interrogate a suspect before reading him his or her Miranda rights.
"The president believes that the law that we have in place is an important one," he said at one point. "The president is committed to it, ensuring that we have protections as well as flexibility," he said at another.
Nevertheless, Gibbs did not suggest that legislative alterations to Miranda and the public safety exception are out of bounds -- though he never explicitly or implicitly indicated that it would be needed either.
"Obviously," he said, "any change that would take place would have to be done legislatively."