In politics, perception is reality.
If you read the Wikipedia entry for Dick Cheney, this is all that's written about torture.
In June 2007, the Washington Post summarized Cheney’s vice presidency in a Pulitzer Prize-winning[100] four-part series, based in part on interviews with former administration officials. The articles characterized Cheney not as a "shadow" president, but as someone who usually has the last words of counsel to the president on policies, which in many cases would reshape the powers of the presidency. When former Vice President Dan Quayle suggested to Cheney that the office was largely ceremonial, Cheney reportedly replied, "I have a different understanding with the president." The articles described Cheney as having a secretive approach to the tools of government, indicated by the use of his own security classification and three man-sized safes in his offices.[101]
The articles described Cheney’s influence on decisions pertaining to detention of suspected terrorists and the legal limits that apply to their questioning, especially what constitutes torture.[102]
Wikipedia
That's it? Cheney influenced the definition of torture?
Not, Cheney intentionally blurred the definition of torture.
Not, Cheney committed war crimes by ordering torture.
Not, Cheney masterminded torture, planned torture well in advance, or employed torture hundreds if not thousands of times, without mercy?
Could someone who understands how Wikipedia works better than I do please explain why Dick Cheney is winning the Wikiwar of promoting his own version of history?
Surely, there must be some way for a community of this size and passion to change it.