Why would she? Cheney claims that enhanced interrogation works when all right-thinking people know that it doesn’t, except of course for Obama’s own intelligence chief. Ed has been all over the Dennis Blair story today but let me add my two cents in calling it a nuclear bombshell in how it incinerates the left’s bad-faith “torture” calculus — or rather, non-calculus. They’re unwilling to concede that there’s any moral choice to be made here because, when push comes to shove, they’re unwilling to say flatly that they’d risk American lives so that Abu Zubaydah doesn’t have to spend time in a box with a caterpillar or whatever. That’s why the Times buried the Blair story today and that’s why Hillary’s lip service about getting everything out in the open, in reply to a question about Cheney claiming that abuses were corrected, is so stunningly disingenuous. The very last thing The One wants is getting everything out in the open about how waterboarding or belly slaps prevented attacks because that means an honest debate on the subject, which in turn leaves him caught between the nutroots and a whole lot of swing voters. The beauty of the Blair story is that, for the very first time, they’ve got someone saying torture works whom they can’t dismiss as “unreliable.” Like I say, nuclear bombshell.

Update: And if you think this is some sort of academic debate, have a look at this. The stakes of extracting vital info in a ticking-bomb scenario are getting higher by the minute.