[President Obama] should commission an expert review of what interrogators learned from the high-value detainees both before and after using brutal methods and whether those methods appear to have saved lives.

foster a better-informed public debate by declassifying as much of the relevant evidence as possible

I don't care whether torture "worked," and any commission that purports to make that determination its focus is not going to end well.

Taylor clearly does care - that is quite evident from the rest of his article, where he begins to make the case, and doesn't forget to tell us that Democrats might have been involved; he still thinks this is just a partisan issue.  

It's my opinion that he believes a commission will not only reveal torture to be effective, but it will totally vindicate the policies and actions of those responsible for them - including Democrats - and leave the door wide open for it to be a tool of future administrations.  

But what do you think will be learned that isn't already known, largely known or currently under investigation?

It seems to me that so much is already known or will be known soon. It makes me wonder what some of you want to learn, or whether you're more out for blood.

Okay, Taylor wants more known about effectiveness of the techniques. I'd like to know more about the pressures that may have been put on the lawyers writing the memos, and whether they went too far over the line in constructing the arguments. There's apparently aleady an internal investigation occurring on this subject.

I suppose we'd find out what people like Pelosi were really told, and whether she's now selectively not remembering or lying.