Truth Commission Battle Begins March 4

Senate Judiciary chair Pat Leahy just scheduled a March 4 hearing entitled "Getting to the Truth Through a Nonpartisan Commission of Inquiry" (h/t Ari Melber). But it won't actually be a hearing to "get the truth" - just a debate over whether or not to get the truth.

Prediction #1: Republican Senators will not want hearings to "get the truth" for these reasons:

1. those who engaged in torture were heroes because we haven't been attacked since 9/11
2. investigating torture will cause terrorists to attack the US and Democrats will be responsible 
3. investigating torture will cause everyone at the CIA to quit immediately
4. torture was "legal" because John Yoo has a law degree
5. Democrats approved torture in top-secret briefings but won't admit it so they are more evil than the torturers

Prediction #2: All of the points made above will be screamed by rightwing liars for the next two weeks: Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Pat Buchanan, Joe Scarborough, the Wall Street Journal, George Will, Frank Gaffney, Ari Fleischer, the Rent-a-Generals, etc. Yes, everyone who was certain we had to invade Iraq will be back on our TV's equally certain that America must torture.

Prediction #3: The Corporate Media will ignore the fact that everyone who defends torture was 1000% wrong about Iraq. The Corporate Media will ignore the fact that everyone who opposes torture was 1000% right about Iraq. Torture supporters will outnumber torture opponents on TV by 3-1.

Prediction #4: The Corporate Media will never point out that 34-45 prisioners were murdered, and they will never show photos of those who were brutally beaten or murdered. Instead they will pretend torture was just uncomfortable.

Prediction #5: The Corporate Media will never point out that George Bush and Dick Cheney both admitted on TV that they authorized torture. They will never mention the meetings of the "Principals" where torture sessions were carefully choreographed.

Prediction #6: The Corporate Media will produce polls showing Americans do not want hearings on torture. Those polls will not ask Americans if they want prosecutions for torture.

Update 1: Sam Stein reports on Sen. Leahy's floor speech today:

Stating that he is in discussion with members of Congress, outside groups, and even the White House, Leahy boiled down his argument to one very rudimentary question: "How can we restore our moral leadership and ensure transparent government if we ignore what has happened?"

"I share that desire to move forward, and to reestablish ourselves as a Nation dedicated to the rule of law, respected and trusted throughout the world," he said, according to prepared remarks. "We also know that the past can be prologue unless we set things right."

Unfortunately the only way to "set things right" is to prosecute the torturers, but Sen. Leahy thinks that would take 15 years - even though Bush and Cheney confessed to their crimes on national TV.

Update 2: Glenn Greenwald thinks there's a 50/50 chance a Truth Commission would lead to prosecutions.

It's true that those who create the Commission might -- as Whitehouse suggests --  intend it to be a substitute for prosecutions rather than a precursor to them.  It's also possible that the Commission can be designed merely to placate those who are demanding that something be done, and -- if immunity is doled out to high-level Bush officials -- it could simply whitewash these crimes and even make prosecutions impossible.  But it's just as possible that once an independent body is created with real subpoena power and an authentic mandate to dig and disclose, it could turn into a Frankenstein:  capable of doing damage far beyond what its creators intended.

As the saying goes, "hope is not a strategy." If we want prosecutions instead of a coverup, we need to demand them.

Update 3: Brad Friedman says Sen. Whitehouse is particularly interested in proving torture doesn't work:

the tenacious Sen. Whitehouse seems keen on using this investigation to help disprove the often asserted notion that the Bush, um, "enhanced interrogation" policies saved lives, despite the lack of evidence supporting that wishful thinking, and the growing body of evidence and testimony --- from those who actually know --- which plainly disputes it.

Retired Maj. Gen. Tony Taguba, who led the investigation of prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib, is quoted from a recent interview as disputing those who have claimed --- from the comfort of their keyboards --- that torture saved lives: "Some of those activities were actually not effective and those who thought so were in the academic or pristine settings of their offices," Taguba told Salon. "What would they know?"

Whitehouse adds: "It is important to prove the point, because they keep saying, 'We saved lives. We interrupted plans. We did this, that and the other.'...Well, when you drill down, there is never a fact there. It turns into fog and evasion."

Again, with Whitehouse on both the Senate Judiciary and Intelligence Committees, with access to much more information than has been made public to date, he oughta know. At least slightly more so than the Wingnuts who rule the public airwaves and, with it, the public "debate" on these issues to date.