What I disagree with is the characterization of this diary as "realistic."  Jane Hamsher writes:

His isn't the administration I'd pick, but the proof will be in what he actually does.  If  for instance he sets up a panel to take on torture, opens up intelligence files and lets the public know how this horrible, malignant policy came to pass, it will go a long way towards assuring people that a choice like Brennan for CIA chief isn't just "business as usual."

I don't think it's possible for both of these to exist:  CIA Director John Brennan, and a fair inquiry into torture.  As I wrote here yesterday, "if you think the panel is going to be able to learn about torture, and point fingers where they belong, while Tenet's BFF and participant/witness Brennan works for Obama, you've got to be nuts.  Guess who ISN'T going to get blamed in such an investigation?  Considering that some in the CIA have been preparing themselves for legal battles, Brennan must be p*ssing himself with glee over having chosen the right horse."

A torture commission is NOT what we will get in exchange for Brennan.  There aren't any good trade-offs in this situation.  We won't get anything at all.  I wrote about the implications of a Brennan selection in another diary here.  And again, I link to this Mondoweiss post where Philip Weiss shows Tenet and Brennan pointing fingers together at Richard Perle for the Iraq War.  The intelligence community wants to see the Bush administration as to blame for everything.  If Brennan is appointed head of the CIA, I think that perspective will be given an authority it does not necessarily deserve and any torture commission will be hopelessly biased.

I