> A good first step would be to stand aside and let ICC prosecute, which even actual pardons would not block.

Who would they prosecute? Obama or Bush?

It seems like the implication people have when talking about this is that the CIA agents or CIA directors should be charged.

From my perspective, would they have done any of these illegal activities if they hadn't been given the green-light from the top?

If Bush/Obama said we will let the ICC prosecute, would any CIA agent/director have done it? Probably not.

I'm not disagreeing about prosecution, I'm just wondering where the buck stops and where the true responsibility lies.

We need no buck. "Following orders" is not an excuse. So, everybody up and down the line who knew they were involved in illegal activity is guilty of that, and also of conspiracy. Many are also guilty of obstruction of justice, which is normally punished more harshly than the crime covered up.

Obama halted the torture program, but could be prosecuted for other crimes involving use of drone strikes on civilians, along with underlings who organized or performed the strikes.

My guess? In exchange for Osama bin Laden, he agreed to turn a blind eye.