The New York Times reports that the Senate Judiciary Committee is demanding to see secret documents held by the White House that reauthorized the use of techniques commonly defined as torture. Secret rulings and laws are anathema to democracy. Following on the heels of this morning's Times blockbuster revealing these documents you can see how quickly the oversight mechanism comes into action.

Paul Kiel reports on the story that has all but gone away due to the failure of Congress to continue oversight of the Justice Department. What ever happened to the U.S. Attorneys Investigation? Kiel can't get a straight answer.

Wired's Noah Schachtman offers a different view of the Blackwater hearings than your average newspaper report. Schachtman focuses on the real lack of knowledge among congressmen in regards to the private military industry. Schachtman looks at the exchanges between committee members and Erik Prince and discovers that nothing substantive is ever really addressed. They talk past each other.

Every paper has an article up about yesterday's Blackwater hearings and Warren Strobel's McClatchy piece is one of the best. It is concise while providing detailed background information about assertions made by Erik Prince, the head of the private military firm.

Should telecoms be given retroactive immunity for helping the US government conduct warrantless wiretapping? This article lays out the positions of Capitol Hill Democrats who are trying to answer this question. The article explains the differences between the Senate and House. Unfortunately, none of the telecoms provided statements to the reporter.

The first article to break news on Don Young officially being under investigation.

This article makes sweeping (potential) predictions about earmark reform and the continued earmarking in the House. The title is particularly misleading as no support is shown to be risked in the article. It also does not reflect that actual changes in earmarking that have occurred this year and are noted in the article.

Unintended consequences of earmark reform were easy to predict. This article provides excellent background and reporting on how openness and transparency works in mysterious ways.

The article sums up perfectly the tone of partisan debate without an overriding sense that partisanship is bad.

This is the best explanation of a highly publicized dust-up on the floor of the House over a complicated controversy regarding a vote on a motion to recommit on the FY 2008 Ag. Approps. bill.