Looking at the extended cut of the John Yoo interview, Jon Stewart did way better than I originally thought, particularly in parts 2 and 3.
There was no hammer moment, like with Cramer, but he did put it to him. Yoo had some intelligent things to say (though I still think they're still wrong).
That being said, it would have helped if Jon Stewart had started off with the basic question: "Do you think Torture or any of the methods you describe are a reliable means of collecting Intelligence?"
You probably would have answered: "It's not up to me. I'm not a strategtist. I was asked a legal question by the Bush White House, and I provided a legal answer."
Even though that question, to me and a lot of Legal scholars, had been answered by the drafting of the Geneva Conventions.
