But oh God, this Dana Milbank column on Attorney General Holder’s testimony yesterday.

Eric Holder is a Guantanamo Bay prisoner.

Stop right there. I have personally seen Guantanamo detainees. (“Prisoners” have been convicted of something.) I’ve seen them strapped to the flatbeds of small vehicles just to be driven a few yards. I’ve seen the bolts in the floors of their interrogation chambers where they’ve been “short-shackled.” I’ve seen them, in restraints, plead their cases through translation to a panel of colonels in air-conditioned trailers that they were just employees on a Taliban road construction crew and why are they still here and contact anyone who was part of the crew and they’ll back the story up. I’ve read the reports about the torture they experienced. And you know what? I didn’t see anything like that at Eric Holder’s testimony yesterday.

(Dana, your throat-clearing caveat about how “He’s not imprisoned at Gitmo, but he’s imprisoned by Gitmo” is just a pathetic excuse for your frivolous opening sentence, and so you are granted no absolution.)

Had Holder not announced plans to send Mohammed to New York, the administration may well have been able to work out a deal in Congress by now to close Gitmo.

Evidence, please. Because I remember how months before the November announcement of the KSM trial, the Senate voted to strip funds for closing Guantanamo from the defense authorization.

A couple weeks ago, I had a conversation with some friends in which the lameness of Milbank emerged, and a friend urged me to take a structural understanding. After all, the guy’s on a beat that requires frivolity and rejects substance. If you write ‘Washington Sketch,’ you have to treat subjects like indefinite detention as a giggle. OK, let’s say that’s true. You could also reject the assignment. Maybe you have some — who knows? — integrity.