Considering that the discussion about Bush administration torture techniques has become increasingly focused on whether or not those techniques were effective, and on what the political ramifications of investigating and debating the matter publicly, this pair of interview segments bears repeating. The fact that the quote comes from Fox News is certainly surprising, but in fairness, Fox anchor Shepard Smith deserves high praise for getting to the heart of the matter.
The highlight is in the second clip on the page:
It is not a partisan matter to prosecute crimes, and whether they helped or not, these were crimes (ratified treaties carry the force of law). The efficacy arguments are unprovable either way, and in some sense, so is the perfectly valid belief that the payoff is not worth the cost even if torturing someone does work (certain episodes of "24" to the contrary notwithstanding).
What is not a gray area is that we have already decided that these are war crimes, and no number of legal memos can stop them from being crimes (imagine the reception a memo that opined that murder wasn't a crime would get!)
We have both prima facie evidence of and confessions to these crimes. There is no partisan issue here whatsoever. Try them.
Update: We already know that the FBI had opted out of all these interrogations because Judge Mueller believed the program was illegal and would "end badly". Now the Levin report reveals that the FBI wasn't the only entity who thought so. So did the Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marines.
Update II: Here's another HuffPo piece about the silliness of the argument about torture's efficacy. Efficacy is irrelevant. Murder works like a charm at getting rid of a rival, but that doesn't serve as a defense if you murder your rivals. Neither should it serve as one here.