Hatch pushed back, reminding Blair sharply that the 2004 report found no such pressure (as it was designed not to find). Blair held his ground. “I’m thinking ‘small-p’ political — the intense interest, the over-watch,” Blair said. Hatch scowled. Not the answer he was after. This isn’t controversial in the intelligence community, but conservatives remain unwilling to let it go.

C’mon, a stunned Levin said. Blair: “I’m very much aware there were dedicated officers in the intelligence service who thought they were carrying out activities that were authorized at the highest levels … I don’t intend to reopen those cases of those officers who acted within their duties. I’m hesitant …” He doesn’t want to call his intelligence officials torturers, but, you know, still. Waterboarding is is clearly torture.

But Eric Holder said it was torture, Levin continued: “That’s troubling to me … I’m looking for your judgment, is waterboarding torture?”

“You’ll just have to make the inference from my answer that on my watch we will not waterboard,” Blair said. He reaffirmed that torture doesn’t produce reliable intelligence. But still: WTF?

Blair: “The general pattern I have in mind [is that], the information more widely available is more general than [that] used against adversaries … We have to assure the American people we are acting correctly but we don’t want to provide intelligence support to those trying to come after us.”

But it’s not creating a loophole for non-Geneva compliant CIA interrogation techniques? “No, sir. Not saying ‘Here’s the document, and then, just kidding, here’s the real stuff.”

Executive Order revokes Executive Order 13440 that interpreted Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. It requires that all interrogations of detainees in armed conflict, by any government agency, follow the Army Field Manual interrogation guidelines. The Order also prohibits reliance on any Department of Justice or other legal advice concerning interrogation that was issued between September 11, 2001 and January 20, 2009.

The Order requires all departments and agencies to provide the ICRC access to detainees in a manner consistent with Department of Defense regulations and practice. It also orders the CIA to close all existing detention facilities and prohibits it from operating detention facilities in the future.

Finally, the Order creates a Special Task Force with two missions. The Task Force will conduct a review of the Army Field Manual interrogation guidelines to determine whether different or additional guidance is necessary for the CIA. It will also look at rendition and other policies for transferring individuals to third countries to be sure that our policies and practices comply with all obligations and are sufficient to ensure that individuals do not face torture and cruel treatment if transferred. This Task Force will be led by the Attorney General with the Secretary of Defense and the Director of National Intelligence as co-Vice Chairs.

More as soon as I see the actual document, but it’s probably premature to conclude from that last paragraph that there’ll be a loophole for CIA. Dennis Blair said repeatedly at his confirmation hearing that he wants one field manual on interrogations for the entire government. Skepticism is appropriate here, but it would be a massive breach of trust for him to emphasize that and then have the task force, which he’ll co-chair, to nevertheless create an exemption for CIA.

Should the intelligence community be on the offense in the war on terror? “Absolutely.”

Is the detention/interrogation program effective? “I’ll have to look into it more closely.”

Does the executive order on interrogation make the Army field manual a guide to getting around interrogation? “I very much share the concern that we not turn our manual into a training manual” but “we want to make the Army field manual … uniform across the agencies.”

But but but if it’s public, won’t you be giving too much information today? “Senator, we face this dilemma all the time in the military … We’ll figure this one out … Specific techniques we will handle much more carefully.”

Immunity for telecoms that took part in warrantless surveillance? Blair doesn’t answer.

Patriot Act expirations? “Those provisions came into force fairly recently … We’ll be gathering data as we go … I’d like a chance to digest all that.”

What’s the appropriate role of the DNI? “Concepts of leading and managing are the core concepts there, and this has to be … more than just signing a piece of paper and putting out a glossy brochure. Has to be working on the incentives down to the organizations so that people who do their jobs are promoted and people who don’t are moved out.”

How important is prosecuting leakers of classified information? “If I could ever catch one of those [leakers], it’d be very good to prosecute them. We need to make sure that people who leak are held accountable.”

“We’ve wrestled with this exact question,” Blair said, “On the one hand, we have to fight it like a war and detain people and get information from them … On the other hand we have to maintain our stature as a country that’s governed by our values and our ideals … These executive orders are going to give this administration a chance to [grapple] with those tough issues and come up with creative responses to them.” Blair says Guantanamo will definitely be closed, and says one of today’s forthcoming executive orders will govern what to do when future terrorism suspects are detained by either the CIA or the military. “We will be true to our ideals and our safety … but I’d be kidding you if I said there was a magic solution that no one else has found.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) announces that President Obama has signed the executive orders. More on those imminently.

“Absolutely,” Blair say he’ll look at it. “The growing role of contractors, the disparity in pay that arises from it … I will look into it, and ensure that we have inherent governmental functions… My strong preference [with] interrogators in the intelligence world is that … the use of contractors be limited to times that a particular dialogue must be used or some other extraordinary circumstance.”

Whitehouse also asked about helping the committee find out the truth about torture. Blair pledged to assist the committee’s efforts. “I intend to make those efforts myself … Like you, I’ve heard anecdotes … we’ve got to sort this out, and find out what the answer is … There is this larger question … what is America’s reputation?”

That sounds like he wouldn’t have a problem with an inquiry.

“The executive order which will be released here soon provides there will be a review of the Army Field Manual as a basis,” Blair said. “If it has my way, it won’t be called the Army Field Manual anymore, it will become the Government Field Manual on Interrogations.”

More on torture: “The president said it so elegantly in his inauguration. We reject the false choice between our safety and our ideals.” Levin makes the point that torture threatens U.S. national security, both through blowback and through “cost[ing] us allies in common causes” and “depriving us of the ability to prosecute an alleged terrorist.” Does Blair agree that torture can harm our security? He wants to look into it in his review, “but the dangers that you cite … I’m sure, have validity to them.” He’ll tell the committee what his review determines.

Blair: “I carried out the American government’s policies … We decried, and said the torture and killing carried out by Indonesian military and paramilitary groups need to stop … That was my consistent message … All of those meetings were attended by the ambassador … Those who say I was carrying out my own policy … are flat wrong.”

Wyden wants to see those communications.