4 reasons I'm thankful for Ed Snowden

[MannyGoldstein]

Time flies. Almost two years since Snowden's revelations. We're reading about Snowden again today, thanks to John Oliver's recent piece.

I believe that the American People owe Mr. Snowden a debt of gratitude:

1. He exposed Operation Spy On Everyone™ (or Operation The Government's Storing Your Dick Pics per Oliver's piece). Exposing the Crypto-Government was important, and I'm not sure there was a better way to do it.

2. This exposure also showed that this guy:



and his crew, can lie to Congress with impunity. When Gen. Clapper (under Bush) said the Iraqis had WMD, was he simply staggeringly wrong? Or purposely lying us into a ruinous war?

3. We learned that lying to Congress is fine with this guy:



judging by what he did when the lying was exposed. (The Transparency President.)

4. And finally, it showed the staggering incompetence of our "security" apparatus. Allowing a low-level employee (or any employee!) to make off with so many documents because he was the local Microsoft Sharepoint administrator? Holy @#$&. This is what we get for our billions and billions of dollars?

Thank you, Mr. Snowden. You showed us important truths. Now it's up to us to act on them.

[KoKo]

1. As we go forward...I bet it will be revealed that there's more that FOUR! K&R

[Maedhros]

2. Anyone with even a moderate level of respect for the Constitution

should be thankful for what Snowden did.

[YoungDemCA]

3. Most people don't care

nt

[RobertEarl]

7. Seems that way

Some don't even care that Obama was spied on before he was president. No telling how much they are spying on him and his family now.

[zeemike]

14. No doubt that he was.

And I would bet they know every little secret he and his whole family has.
Which explains why he does nothing at all about it...and can only get done what they want done.

But no one cares because no one wants to consider it...it shatters our illusion of good and evil.

[TerrapinFlyer]

30. (Fixed) Majority of people don't even know who Snowden is...

It's way down the priorities of outrage list.

[bvar22]

31. I'll bet that more Europeans know Snowden's name than Americans.

Of course, the media in Europe is better than in the US.

[sabrina 1]

35. And yet, a majority of Americans polled believe that Snowden is a Whistle Blower NOT a

traitor, as the government has attempted to portray him.

So yes, people DO care, they care a lot, which is why there is the lying by people like Clapper and Alexander and the rest of them. Because they KNOW people care.

And they are losing the propaganda war. Which is why we keep seeing attempts to attack Snowden, which only makes them look WORSE.

[TerrapinFlyer]

37. "And yet..."? The majority of Americans don't know who he is! Who is spinning?

But the MINORITY of American who do know who he is.. think what?.. who cares.

If you want to worship a hero, they have a hologram of him... go stand there and stare at it.

[sabrina 1]

84. Did you know that this is an adult forum?

If you want to worship a hero, they have a hologram of him... go stand there and stare at it.

Is that what you think women do, that they are so infantile their opinions cannot be based on their intelligence but obviously must be based on immature teen hero worship? Because everyone knows women don't think for themselves!

Really? Here on DU you post something like that to a grown woman?

Frankly your credibility with this woman, just went out the door.

I dismiss everything else you had to say as will most mature, thinking women.

[woo me with science]

4. Thank you for this post. The entire nation owes a debt to Snowden.

Actually, his revelations are important for the world. The secrecy and depth of corruption he revealed don't just affect Americans.

Here is the video with John Oliver:

[locks]

8. Thanks, woo me

John Oliver's interview is courageous and priceless. Snowden handled himself well and was able to take John's ribbing as well as his sharp questions.

[sabrina 1]

36. That interview was PRICELESS. Brilliant and Snowden was excellent, couldn't have been better if

the whole thing had been planned.

The whole point of the interview on Oliver's part was to remind people that the Patriot Act is ready to expire and no one is talking about it. So we an assume Congress will quietly extend it again.

Oliver chose Snowden to help him highlight this anti-Constitutional 'law' that has been instrumental in the massive spying put in place by some of the worst Right Wing law breakers in recent memory.

Everyone should watch that video.

Thanks to Oliver for going to this trouble to keep us informed.

[merrily]

51. +1

[grasswire]

5. thanks to you too, Manny

Fighting for transparency in your own unique way.

I salute you and Ed.

[Scrabbleddie]

6. Orwellian free-fall to fascism. nt

[randome]

9. You would not be a good purveyor of Democracy.

The majority of Americans, as John Oliver showed (okay, he only interviewed a few people but it seemed representative to me) don't care that the NSA spies on foreign communications.

That is what Snowden is utterly incapable of understanding. During the interview, he kept going on about what the NSA could be doing. He kept repeating that he wanted the 'American people' (and how overused is that phrase?) to have a conversation.

When the truth of the matter is that conversation has already come and gone.

What some really mean when they say 'have a conversation' is more like, "I'm going to keep complaining until the conversation goes my way."

That's not much in the line of democracy, is it? Don't we have a right to say we don't care? Apparently some don't think so.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

[Luminous Animal]

13. The majority of U.S. citizens don't know squat about a lot of things.

The data on American political apathy is rather consistent, and stunning. Begin with the fact that even in presidential election years, 40 to 50 percent of the voting-age public simply chooses not participate in the voting process at all, while two-thirds chooses not to vote in midterm elections.

Even more striking is what they do and do not know. An Annenberg Public Policy Center poll from last September found that only 36 percent of Americans can name the three branches of government, and only 38 percent know the GOP controls the House. The Center’s 2011 poll “found just 15 percent of Americans could correctly identify the chief justice of the United States, John Roberts, while 27 percent knew Randy Jackson was a judge on American Idol.”

A 2010 Findlaw.com poll found that almost two-thirds of Americans — 65 percent — were incapable of naming even a single member of the U.S. Supreme Court. A 2010 Pew poll discovered that 41 percent of Americans are unable to name the current vice president of the U.S; in other words, Oliver could just as easily (if not more easily) compile a video of Times Square visitors looking stumped when asked if they knew who Joe Biden, or Antonin Scalia, is.

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/04/06/john-oliver-interview-political-disengagement-american-public/

[Rex]

24. .

[Marr]

25. Oliver's entire point was that we have not made an informed judgement on the subject,

because our media serves us so poorly on the topic and that national dialogue has simply been endlessly put off. That's why he showed the clip of Bieber news interrupting an interview on the PATRIOT Act, and everything changing with the public when placed in the context of 'dick pics'.

[djean111]

27. So - Democracy means Snowden just just keep quiet, because you don't care?

I thought Democracy meant that Snowden can say whatever he wants, and that you don't have to care. Or click. Or listen. Or read about him. Nobody is making you do any of those things. Or do you feel that, since you don't care about something, it should be scrubbed from existing? Very strange notion of Democracy.

[randome]

28. It's not just me who doesn't care what the NSA does with foreign communications.

It's the vast majority of Americans. Snowden can talk all he wants and for as long as he wants, it's simply sad that he can't accept the fact that we're already aware of the issues and we've decided it's not that important.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]

[djean111]

29. And you are upset because he gave an interview to a comedian on HBO and you were forced

to watch or hear about it? All you have to do is not watch, not click, don't see the movie, it is really very simple.
Unless you think that Big Brother stuff is okay when it is good for you.
The "vast majority of Americans" likely don't know or care about global warming. Does that mean global warming folks should just STFU? And I don't think you can extrapolate vast numbers of Americans from anything, about this, and then say "we" as if you speak for them all. Just don't read about this stuff, easy peasy.

I think it is very sad when some people get all upset because they cannot control what other people think.

[randome]

49. Who's upset? Just expressing my opinion, that's all.

I just think the entire Snowden Affair -soon to pass its 2 year mark- is overblown and that Oliver's interviews are more representative of what people think than DU.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

[bvar22]

32. For someone who claims he doesn't care,

you sure make your presence known in every thread about Snowden or Governmental Spying on citizens.

How many times have you already posted to Snowden threads today?
10..... more?


The point is, if you did NOT care, you wouldn't be spending so much time trying to undercut Snowden's heroism and attacking DUers for supporting Snowden.

People spend their time on what is important to them.
Your voluminous number posts on this subject is evidence that you actually DO CARE...Very Much.

[randome]

50. It's an interesting subject.

I find it fascinating when Snowden gets a pass for saying "leakers should be shot in the balls". Or when he says he only gave information to responsible journalists then turns around and says it wasn't his fault information wasn't redacted properly.

I think it's an enormous disconnect available only here on DU because no one -and I mean no one- that I know outside DU gives two shits about the NSA collecting foreign communications.

But that's just my experience.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

[LanternWaste]

56. Which, being such a small sample size, may be an obstacle towards objectivity.

"But that's just my experience..."

Which, being such a small sample size, may be an obstacle towards objectivity.

[randome]

59. Of course, but at least I'm willing to admit that.

All I have to go on is my amorphous 'feelings' about what people around me see as important. Not a scientific poll, by any means.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[merrily]

53. Democracy is a form of government and no one stopped you from saying you don't care.

[randome]

57. True, Democracy isn't the same as 'majority rules'.

But the majority can be used as a barometer to see where time and effort needs to be expended. I think it's clear that not many people care what the NSA is up to so long as it primarily involves other countries. But that's just my take on the 'public pulse'.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[merrily]

58. What you are basically saying is that most USians don't know and don't care. That really has nothing

to do with democracy or anyone ruling.

[randome]

63. Sure it does. We are in control of who our representatives are and what they do in our name.

It's an incredibly convoluted system that arguably takes the heart out of the concept of Democracy but if the majority of people don't protest something, doesn't that equate to tacit approval? At least on something of this nature.

Other than pundits making points about the NSA -and often very good points- I don't think the 'man-on-the-street' cares enough to put pressure on his/her representatives on this topic.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[merrily]

68. How does not knowing or caring who Snowden is mesh with controlling our representatives?

(BTW, it's sweet that you think we control them.)

[randome]

74. Yeah, well, that's more of a concept than reality, admittedly. (But I'm still sweet.)

What Oliver showed was that most people knew Snowden's name, even if they mistakenly associated it with Wikileaks or something else. But the fact that they knew the name shows that what he did penetrated the public consciousness to some degree. And the fact that it failed to make much of an impression on that public consciousness speaks volumes about what we think is important.

There is far more uproar -and from corporations, even!- about LGBT rights in Indiana than there will ever be regarding Snowden. Going on 2 years now so I think that's a fair assessment.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

[elias49]

87. Oh, you'll think it's a "fair assessment" 10 years from now.

Doesn't it depress you at times that you're so fixated on Edward Snowden? Let it go, you'll feel better.

[randome]

135. DU is just a way to practice my debating skills.

It's mental exercise that keeps me trim for other, weightier matters. And Snowden is an 'easy run'.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

[merrily]

94. IOW, being ignorant about Snowden and the 4th Am. really has nothing to do with democracy or

majority rule (except, of course, that you're sweet, which is indisputable)?

The thing is, though, some people do know and do care a lot. Some of them are on DU, some of them are in organizations like the ACLU, some of them are in government and so on. That a topic is not known among the same people who couldn't tell Jay Leno the name of the Vice President is not the be all and end all of the importance of what Snowden did.

[randome]

131. I'm not saying that people are ignorant.

I'm postulating that they know enough and have decided it's a non-issue. It's a more laudatory theory than yours, which is simply that people are ignorant, full stop. And since both our theories mean nothing will change on this topic...
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

136. You're perfectly fine to tell the government that you don't care if they violate your

Constitutional Rights. But it's not fine for you to say the rest of us don't get to care about them violating ours.

[navarth]

10. this thread..

is another reason I'm grateful for Manny.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. 5. He showed the lengths "our" government will go to stifle dissent and whistleblowers.

[Buzz Clik]

12. I want Snowden to father my children.

And then he will leak all my DU post to Family Social Services in hopes that my children will be taken away from me.

God, I love that man.

[Blue_Tires]

15. The FSB, ISIS and China's Ministry of State Security are equally grateful

Just thought they needed to be mentioned...

[MannyGoldstein]

17. And what did they learn from Mr. Snowden

Other than what I wrote above, along with some utterly-obvious stuff?

[Blue_Tires]

39. Start here:

Last edited Wed Apr 8, 2015, 08:11 PM - Edit history (1)

http://cjlab.memri.org/analysis-and-special-reports/al-qaedas-embrace-of-encryption-technology-part-iii-july-2014-january-2015-islamic-state-isis-and-other-jihadis-continue-to-develop-their-cyber-and-encryption-capabilities-post-snowden/

and here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/11506846/The-blog-that-proves-Islamic-State-jihadists-were-listening-to-Edward-Snowden.html

[elias49]

88. That's all you have? Oh snap.

Life goes on.

[Blue_Tires]

89. There's plenty more, but I'm not doing your research for you

so get off your ass and crank up the google, smart guy

[elias49]

90. I'm quite happy with Mr Snowden.

And I have more important things to do than try to smear someone.
Silly.

[merrily]

96. It's not the responsibiity of anyone but you to do research to prove a claim you made.

[merrily]

95. Only the average American learned the things to which you linked.

[ronnie624]

100. "Islamic extremists are locked in a digital arms race with our intelligence services"

[bvar22]

33. Snowden gave NOTHING to those you claim.

He turned everything over to established and credible journalists, as Whistle Blowers are supposed to do.

The staffs of those outlets examined everything , and released what they considered important, and with held anything that would hurt American or European interests.

Since you made the claim,
offer some support or links corroborating your claim that Snowden gave information to FSB, ISIS, and China.

[Blue_Tires]

38. But they have all benefited from the leaks

Russia has almost certainly benefited directly...There's no denying that...

[sabrina 1]

40. Thanks for retracting the false claim regarding who Snowden gave the documents to.

And yes, bad people DO benefit when our Government engages in illegal activity against its own people.

It's way past time to clear the NSA and other Government agencies of left over Bush/Cheney appointees.

Democrats were elected to begin the process of removing those who began the destruction of our Constitutional Rights.

You just pointed out one good reason why that process should have started a long time ago.

Why eg, is Bush Buddy, Clapper still the head of the NSA?

Are there no Democrats qualified to watch out for our National Security?

The illegal behavior of these Bush appointees necessitates exposure.

Their illegal actions are causing harm to the US.

Odd you place the blame on Whistle Blowers, rather than the Bush/Cheney leftovers in all these agencies.

[Blue_Tires]

43. I've never said he gave documents to anyone

although he indisputably showed files to some unnamed Chinese officials to verify his credentials...And to this day there has still been no satisfying explanation on why Moscow has been so "hospitable" to him...

And what's in Snowden's head is worth a thousand times more than some five-year-old powerpoint slides...NSA cryptologic info, analysis of information, etc...Snowden could give all that away and no one would ever know...

[bvar22]

45. If Snowden "indisputably showed files to some unnamed Chinese officials ",

Last edited Wed Apr 8, 2015, 03:37 PM - Edit history (1)

then it should be EASY for you to provide us with some credible links that support your claim.


And didn't you just say that "Snowden "indisputably showed files to some unnamed Chinese officials".
That contradicts your denial where you claim you never said Snowden gave documents to anyone.

Internal contradictions bother me.

[Blue_Tires]

139. there's a difference between "showed" and "handed over"

but please, keep going

[sabrina 1]

92. The US Government FORCED Snowden to be trapped in Russia. And give me some credible

source please to prove that allegation of 'showing documents to unnamed Chinese officials'.

Airc, Republican Chair of the Intel Committee, that moron Rogers, made a similar claim and for once was asked to prove it. We never heard from him again on that issue. Kudos to Anderson Cooper for pressing him on such a despicable claim with zero to back it up.

So let's see your source for this please.

[kelliekat44]

41. Wonder if he helped Russia with their hacking???? nt

[Blue_Tires]

44. I wouldn't speculate that far, but

I do find it hard to believe that Kaspersky's huge "discovery" a couple of months ago was made with no input from Snowden whatsoever, especially given that they're in the same city...

[bvar22]

46. Tin Foil Hat time!

[Blue_Tires]

48. Insult away...Gimmie your best cracks...

I've been called much, much worse by your brethren the past two years...So I'm numb to it

[sabrina 1]

93. Conspiracy theories belong in the speculation forum.

Talk about unfounded nonsense. I remember when DU was about provable facts.

I wonder if the NSA under Bush appoinntee, Clapper has been helping China spy on us!

See, anyone can put on their tin foil hat and throw out ridiculous Conspiracy Theories, but here you need to have something to back them up.

To anyone who takes my China/NSA CT seriously, it was merely to demonstrate how wild we can get, if we don't care about facts.

[RufusTFirefly]

16. I'm thankful for Snowden, too.

He has shown great courage and poise under pressure that I'm not sure I could duplicate.
And I'm grateful for this thread, so I can say this: Edward Snowden is a hero.

Thanks Manny. Put 'er there!

[cantbeserious]

18. Snowden Laid To Rest - Once And For All Time - That Our Government Cannot Be Trusted - Ever

eom

[bvar22]

47. Very appropriate for a cemetary or War Memorial.

[DonCoquixote]

19. I will not paint a Halo on Snowden, but

Point Four you made illustrates soemthing that oddly enough, got the least amount of attention, even though it has the potential to be the worst fact of all.

PRIVATE CONTRACTORS ARE HANDLING SENSITIVE DATA, THE SORT OF DATA THAT WOULD GET PEOPLE KILLED

Why is this the WORST fact of all?

Well, let's ignore the fact that it makes the job of actual spies ten times more difficult. We knew that when Bush outed Valerie Plame, aspy that was tryign to find out how many Nukes Kim Il Jong had, you know, the one guy that has been making threats of war? If any Microsoft contractor can hand your name to the KGB, you are pretty much dead anyway. Not like the Chinese and Russians cannot offer a contractor money and security that Micorsoft would not even pretend to offer.

No, let's actually raise this, it means that our Oligarchy is so wanting to make a profit that they do not even want the CIA get the tools needed to actually handle this. They want to make a profit on death and dying. Let's forget the fact that most Corporate types are NOT loyal to America, but pirates willing to hop nations. They so worship the proft market that even SPYING has to be privatized! Never mind the fact that some disgruntled execs can hop to Dubai and sell the lives of millions for all the gold they can pour over them, what this says is, they do not NEED to do that to make a buck! This atrocity makes the Rosenbergs seem like a JOKE!

[Autumn]

20. I'm thankful for those very reasons too. My favorite thing about him

is that so many people are up in arms about what he did and it just drives them crazy, they twist themselves into pretzels to put him in a bad light like with the Oliver interview. Take Crapper for one example, I bet he just obsesses over him.

[GoneFishin]

21. It's a small consolation in lieu of having leaders who are honest and honorable, who have the

best interests of the American public as their first priority, rather than stuffing their crony contractor buddies' wallets with taxpayer money and eavesdropping on intimate conversations between overseas servicemen and their wives.

But I'll take it.

[Rex]

26. He does make the authoritarians foam at the mouth. Which is both sad and entertaining.

They've moved into the realm of just plain silly.

[bvar22]

34. They have become pathetic parodies of themselves.

It would be better if any of them had a sense of humor,
or the ability to look at themselves.

[Oilwellian]

23. Citizen Four also clearly pointed out...

Attempted lawsuits against the NSA have failed for lack of proof. Snowden provided that proof we desperately needed to go forward.

[Maedhros]

138. Technically, 'lack of standing' rather than 'lack of proof.'

The courts refused cases because the plaintiffs could not show that they were injured by the surveillance. Now they can.

[msanthrope]

42. Lying to Congress was apparently fine with Congress. No investigation,

referral to the DOJ, or censure. Heck....the Democratic Senator involved barely made a wave after the closed session.

I'm surprised, Manny, that you've never explored that angle. What was said in the closed session that made Congress blanch from an investigation?

[Rex]

52. Agree totally, I didn't expect the WH to spank the CIA/NSA for bad behavior.

That is the job of Congress and they just passed on it. Without a single footnote.

[msanthrope]

55. Which suggests that Senator Wyden understood that he asked a question that

should have been asked in closed session.

So Clapper may have lied, but it didn't rise to the level of judicial notice.....i.e. perjury. And I think it's puerile to give a crap about anything beneath the criminal standard......especially when the Senator involved and the Congress didn't get all het up about it.

To go a step further and blame the President for not doing Congress's job? I wonder at that.

[bvar22]

60. Was General CLapper under oath that day he testified before Senator Wyden?

Why, yes he was.

[msanthrope]

65. You do realize that a lie under oath isn't necessarily perjury, right? Which is why

Wyden...who had the power to initiate investigation, didn't.

[bvar22]

67. Well, at least that is a step forward for you,

and open admission that Clapper lied under oath.

Thank You.

[msanthrope]

70. He may have. It doesn't matter though, does it, as Wyden and Congress

obviously accepted his explanation. They didn't think it rose to perjury. So why should the President do the job of Congress?

[bvar22]

72. Do you really claim to know what Wyden et al were THINKING?

I can think of several other better reasons why Crapper wasn't charged.
The biggest is that Clapper has protection from the A-Team.

James Clapper: Obama stands by intelligence chief as criticism mounts

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/12/james-clapper-intelligence-chief-criticism

What does matter is that he looked straight into the cameras, under oath, and told the World that the NSA wasn't spying on Americans.... an outright LIE,
but THIS is the guy you choose to line up behind and support over the Whistle Blower who hasn't been caught in a LIE yet????

Curiouser and curiouser.

[Rex]

75. I wouldn't trust either one with a wooden nickle. I know mis has no love for Snowden.

However, I see no reason to trust someone that worked for Booze Allen that ran off to our traditional enemies. Nor do I see a reason to trust a military general that will look right into the camera (as you said) and lie his ass off.

True, mis is right, he cannot say 'no comment' BUT something non committal and most def not let himself get backed into a yes or no question...a general must be use to leaping around all kinds of verbiage.

I don't like the fact that Congress seems to not lift one finger to correct these issues...why the FUCK do they waste 50 voting sessions to repeal the ACA...when the fate of national security sits in the hands of people that lie, cheat and spy on their own people?

Snowden should have headed straight for Venezuela the moment he got a chance...heading to China then Russia...either means he is stupid and gullible or was too much in a hurry to think things out.

NOT at all upset about the revealing of the NSA/CIA spy apparatus exploiting the laws in America. HOWEVER, I knew that decades ago...so this is not anything new to me.

That is what I have said from the very beginning of all this and I am not changing my mind now.

It's all still the same Kabuki Theater, with the WH shouldering most of the actual running of state and it is bullshit.

[msanthrope]

99. I don't support Clapper. I'm just telling you what the law is. If you think Wyden was pressured by

the White House, I suggest you know very little about Ron Wyden.

[merrily]

101. Lying to Congress is against the law.

[msanthrope]

102. Indeed--one wonders why Congress didn't pursue the remedy they have at hand if they thought

what Clapper did merited prosecution.

[merrily]

103. Same thing could be said about the D of J.

The primary function of the legislative branch is to make laws. A primary function of the Executive Branch is to execute laws, including by prosecuting lawbreakers.

[msanthrope]

107. Why would the DOJ usurp Congress? You have the process reversed. nt

[merrily]

109. It would not have been usurpation. They both had the ability. And Clapper is Obama's employee.

[msanthrope]

114. The DOJ cannot act in this matter without a referral. Also, the Congress declined to

refer to DOJ, or to investigate....ask yourself why.

[Rex]

61. True, well I don't think the POTUS should have to run the country by himself.

Yet that is what he has been doing more or less. No help from Congress, no help from the SCOTUS. As far as Wyden goes - all the general had to do is say 'no comment' and press forward. That was all drama that both men could have avoided, but they didn't and now it is public record.

To me, the spying done on Congress is a far bigger issue that didn't even get much of a response. I sure don't expect Obama to do every single job that Congress should be doing. And I don't count on the SCOTUS to do anything but make decisions like the one for Hobby Lobby and Citizens United.

I am sick and tired of people blaming Obama for Congress and/or the SCOTUS actions.

[bvar22]

64. Obama does NOT do everything himslef.

He has a "team".

[font size=5]
The DLC New Team
Progressives Need NOT Apply
[/font]
(Screen Capped from the DLC Website)

[Rex]

66. When I say the POTUS, I mean his cabinet and advisers etc..

My point is he should not have to do the job of the other branches of government. However, he has to do a lot of their work for them, they are too dysfunctional to work properly. Not so much the SCOTUS as the real culprit in so many things, Congress.

I'll worry about this team, when we actually have three functioning branches of government again and a unbiased forth branch.

[bvar22]

71. His choices for cabinet...

...were a BIG part of the problem.

[msanthrope]

69. You can't really say "no comment" when you are testifying. I think Clapper handled

the whole situation badly, but I think the reason why Wyden didn't take action is because he realized he put Clapper in a tough spot.

I find a peculiar agenda......one that decries the imperial presidency, yet expects the President whip out a wand when the cause is right......on DU.

[Rex]

73. Well 'imperial presidency' is a silly term that I hope nobody uses here on DU.

Obama has more than proven that HIS WH is not interested in any kind if imperial rule. Almost every action by this WH, shows the complete opposite imo.

There are many agendas on DU and yes I've seen it too that is one...haven't seen it in a while and hope people are not pretending still that both parties are the same.

[bvar22]

78. You won't find the words "Imperial Presidency" here.

They changed that to the "Unitary Executive" backed with the Patriot Act and the NDAA
which gives the President the secret power to assassinate anyone he wants anywhere in the World, without oversight, due process, poof or a presentation of the evidence.
"Suspicion" is the only metric to determine the death penalty from the Oval Office,
and the collateral murder of innocent civilians in sovereign countries is over looked.
Not even Nixon went there.

Now, you might not want to call this an "Imperial" Presidency,
but this comes damned close.

[Rex]

80. Well sadly I resigned to the fact that all of that is over the heads of our upper level managers.

Namely the three branches of government and the media that protects them and Wall Street. I meant that I see PERSONALLY as the man and his group, don't want to go to war with other countries and are trying to stay out of WWIII. Don't want to expand the US empire and show just the opposite with trying to normalize relations with Cuba and Iran.

I meant on the personal level that does have some distinction between warmongers and non warmongers. I know I've said Obama is a corporatist in the past (not as much as I once thought), but he is NOT a warmonger nor trying to help out the MIC. He might be trying to help out Wall Street, I won't debate that one.

However I know I am crazy, since I think he is going to fast track the TPP so he can veto the shit out of it or change it so much that nobody will go along with it. Then sit back and watch them foam at the mouth. I think he has gotten a taste for power and influence and won't give it up these last two years.

I admit to being petty enough to just watching the GOP foam at the mouth over the things he does, makes me a happy camper. I would like to see more (legally shackle Wall Street to the debt they owe society).

At 43 I got to take what I can get.

[bvar22]

76. Wrong again,

and clearly desperate if you are forced to dredge up the old Magic Wand BS.

You need someone to write some new material for you.

[msanthrope]

77. What, precisely, is wrong? No.....you cannot say "No Comment" when testifying.

You don't have that choice.

[bvar22]

81. You can't say "no comment",

.....but you can LIE through your teeth under oath, and thats OK.

And you support this?????

[msanthrope]

97. No--I don't support lying under oath. Not in any form. But it happens, and when it does, I

look to the law, rather than emotion, to address it.

I've had defendants lie on the stand about things they were embarrassed about. Did that make them perjurers? No. I've caught cops in venial lies. Did it make them perjurers? No.

Clapper probably lied. He certainly did not tell the whole truth. But I respect Wyden on this. If it rose to perjury, I suspect Wyden would have done something about it.

[merrily]

106. He doesn't. Clapper works for him, though.

So does Eric Holder. And Obama's job is to execute the laws, which includes prosecuting wrongdoing, which the POTUS does through the D of J.

Clearly, Obama had plenty of recourse against Clapper for lying to Congress and clearly Obama did not want to do anything about that.

I make no judgement about whether that was right of Obama or wrong of Obama. Perhaps it would have been unjust to prosecute Clapper. One can make that argument. However, I also don't make the leap that disciplining or prosecuting Clapper means Obama has to run the country alone. According to a program I saw recently about security and the white house, 1700 people work inside the White House on a daily basis--and that's just the White House, not the Pentagon or the State Department or the D of J or Homeland Security or or or.

The President doesn't have to do much of anything on his own.

[merrily]

104. Or maybe Wyden understood he asked a question to which Americans deserved an answer.

Total speculation.

So Clapper may have lied, but it didn't rise to the level of judicial notice

Huh?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_notice

[msanthrope]

111. Wow--thanks autospeak--that should have read "DOJ notification."

[merrily]

113. Again, huh?

[msanthrope]

115. Are you unfamiliar with the process? nt

[merrily]

117. What process?

If you have something to say, say it. Otherwise, please stop wasting your time and mine with these games.

[msanthrope]

121. The process of prosecuting Clapper, right? I assume you would want him prosecuted, right? Now,

tell me....do you want him prosecuted for "lying" or do you think this is a contempt charge?

[merrily]

125. I understand the processes of DEALING with Clapper, if anyone wanted to deal with him.

I assume you would want him prosecuted, right?

Assume nothing. You might check my post to Rex.

tell me....do you want him prosecuted for "lying" or do you think this is a contempt charge

Since no one is prosecuting him for anything and what I want is irrelevant to those in power, I'm guessing this is more of a power play than a question.

[msanthrope]

127. So you want him "dealt" with, but not prosecuted? nt

[merrily]

128. Now, you're twisting words. You can read and your profession includes dealing precisely with words,

so I have to assume the twisting is intentional. I would think that would be beneath you.

Again, if you have something to say, say it or stop wasting my time and yours.

Actually, never mind. This has been another ridiculous exchange in which your desire is not to communicate but to flex and play games. Both get old and boring fast and I'm over it.

Again, if anyone wanted to deal with Clapper, they could have. Nor have you denied that.

[msanthrope]

129. I am asking you what you want. A prosecution? nt

[merrily]

130. I did want a discussion. Apparently, that's not on the table, as usual. See you another time.

BTW, as you know. Replies 125 and 128 answered your question.

[msanthrope]

132. I am trying to have an honest discussion with you, but that's impossible if you refuse

to define exactly what you want.

[merrily]

133. Not true, but, again, this is way too boring and pointless for us to continue.

[msanthrope]

134. You started this discussion with me, merrily...and not for anything, but leaving the

sandbox when you are faced with the difficult question:

"What do you want?"

indicates that perhaps you started this discussion with me for the sake of argument, only. In the future....why not refrain from engaging me?

[joshcryer]

79. Still can't believe Manny is beating this "clapper lied" dead horse.

We've had the discussion so many fucking times.

I guess anything to shit on Obama and question Obama's moral character.

[Octafish]

82. Because what Clapper said was a lie?

On March 12th, 2013, during a United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence hearing, Senator Ron Wyden asked Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper the following question:

"Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?"

Director Clapper responded "No, sir."

Incredulously, Senator Wyden asked "It does not?"

Director Clapper responded "Not wittingly. There are cases where they could inadvertantly perhaps collect, but not wittingly."

http://www.hasjamesclapperbeenindictedyet.com/

[joshcryer]

83. Yeah, but saying Obama is fine with liars.

That's the shit talking part.

No question as to why Wyden himself didn't put Clapper up for charges. No question as to why Wyden asked a question Clapper couldn't legally answer. No nuance. Just some bullshit trash talk about Obama's moral character.

No one even wants to talk about how Wyden and Udall were fighting for FISA secrecy before anyone came along and that Wyden was asking a rhetorical question to Clapper so that he could earn some political capital and move the legislation forward. Oh no. Evil Third Way Mark Udall lost his job because he wasn't liberal enough.

[Octafish]

85. So why state Clapper did not lie?

The guy should have been fired same day.

BTW: I posted on Wyden and Udall and what they were warning us about as soon as I heard:

PATRIOT Act Being Used to Keep Super Duper Government Spy Operation Top Secret

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=440614

[joshcryer]

86. I did not say that.

I am annoyed that it keeps being brought up to trash Obama after it's been discussed to death.

[merrily]

137. What is clearly true is that Clapper's lies were acceptable (or close to) to anyone

who could have done something about them, including Obama. The idea that no one but Congress could or should have done something about them is a red herring and a silly debate. If anyone had a serious problem, he should have done something and could have, whether it was Wyden, Obama or even Holder.

What is a lot less clear (to me), IMO, is whether anything should have been done to Clapper about Clapper's lies to Congress. Off the top of my head, I am not sure I can answer that, but I think it would have made a much more interesting discussion than a lot of the knee jerking that took place on this thread. But, few seem to be here for real discussion. (That is not directed at any one poster. Far from it.)

BTW, FWIW, Obama did say Clapper should have been more careful.

[msanthrope]

98. Those who would question Obaman's moral charatcer on this issue are ignorant of civics, or, even

worse, they think you and I are.

[merrily]

105. Because civics teaches it's okay to lie to Congress?

BTW: http://thehill.com/policy/technology/197060-obama-clapper-should-have-been-more-careful-in-congressional

[msanthrope]

108. Civics teaches you that this is purview of Congress. nt

[merrily]

110. Not at all. If so, it's a really lame civics course.

[msanthrope]

112. Actually, yes. It's called keeping the branches of gov't seperate. Congress declined to

investigate the incident, or otherwise notify the DOJ. Ask yourself why.

[merrily]

116. Which branch employs Clapper? "I serve at the pleasure of the President."

Congress declined investigate the incident, or otherwise notify the DOJ. Ask yourself why.

There are probably at least 5 possible answers to that. So what?

[msanthrope]

119. Yes--and if Congress declines to investigate, what, precisely, is the Executive supposed to

do?

[merrily]

120. What he is supposed to do is a different issue from what he can do. Separation of powers does NOT

disempower the POTUS from dealing with the head of the CIA if the POTUS choose so to do. You know that, so why the games and talk of civics class?

[msanthrope]

122. Well--upthread you don't seem to be able to answer what you want Clapper prosecuted for. How about

you answer that question, and then we can discuss what happens...

It would probably also help your argument if you could focus on one subthread.

[merrily]

123. So far, my posts are not the ones that need help.

You, however, might try stating your position in declarative sentences and answering the questions you actually were asked instead of pretending I'm the one not answering questions.

[msanthrope]

124. I'm asking you upthread what you want. Please answer that upthread. nt

[merrily]

126. I just did.

[neverforget]

118. and if you're the head of a powerful spy agency, you can get

away with it.

Clapper could have said "I can better answer that question in closed session or it's classified" but he didn't. He lied and got away with it.

[merrily]

54. i would rather know about the spying than not know about it.

[NCTraveler]

62. Excellent op. k&r. nt.

[KoKo]

91. Recommend!