Malcome Nance to Edward Snowdon.....

[riversedge]

Link to tweet

Edward Snowden‏Verified account @Snowden

By all means, doubt me. Be suspicious and test my every claim. That's rational.

Then, do the same for those in power. That's American.

Retweets
8,166
Likes
19,516
Matt :3
s i n a
Jeannie Wood
selaoseegera
Erin Leigh Lowery
maylan
Faith Adereti
Mariya Petkova
Ricardo Matos

3:39 PM - 13 Mar 2017
369 replies 8,166 retweets 19,516 likes

[nilesobek]

1. Did you see the John Oliver interview with Edward Snowden?

My opinion only that Snowden handled Oliver deftly, was as witty and humorous as Oliver, and seemed at ease doing it.

If you are right and Snowden is a traitor I will make a 100$ donation to the charity of your choice.

[Maraya1969]

2. I bet Snowden helped Russian put Trump in power.

They gave him asylum and I'm sure it wasn't free.

[JCanete]

11. That seems unlikely. Even if he was coerced or was willing to help the effort, I'm still wondering

how Russia actually got Trump elected. They absolutely put resources into trying, but that's fucking nothing compared to our own shitty media. I don't give Putin that much credit.

But if we were concerned about all that maybe we should have granted Snowden clemency once it was revealed that our government was breaking the fucking law, in breach of the Constitution public servants are sworn to defend.

Even if people think Snowden should have gone another way and two wrongs don't make a right, where the fuck is the outrage here about what our government did? So many people just trash Snowden without any mention of that. That's something we are meant to forget. That's something that what, should be expected and accepted?

[uponit7771]

18. This makes no logical sense, quid pro quo work exactly as described

[JCanete]

28. actually neither of us know what happened, except that our government was being fucking shady. I

don't understand why there is such an authoritarian streak on DU when it comes to this issue.

[delisen]

99. I aso am curious about the authoritarian streak on DU regarding this issue.

[FarPoint]

127. Please...

come out of the snow storm for a while...Once you warm up, your logical, critical thinking skill should return. Snowden is a traitor...no doubt in my mind...Putin didn't embrace him for free....a high price of Treason was the price paid.

[JCanete]

128. Our government was lying to us and potentially undermining our democracy, but you go ahead and

do their work for them to discredit the person who brought it into the light.

What is astonishingly ironic is that there is plenty of cross-over between people who absolutely trust our agencies and think there was no malfeasance and that they would never use those capabilities in unethical ways, BUT think that Comey swung the election for Trump. How do they, or you if you agree, have the capacity to hold those two thoughts at the same time?

[FarPoint]

126. Absolutely correct!

There has to be a fair exchange and Putin dose not donate anything!

[pnwmom]

3. Since when does being witty and humorous have anything to do with being a traitor?

Snowden's actions speak for themselves. He didn't go for help to a Senator like Sanders or Warren. He didn't consult with an attorney about the whistle-blowers statute. He took his laptops to China and Russia, where the contents were shared. And he's stayed in Russia ever since.

[nilesobek]

5. I dunno about that. But I would trust Sanders.

Sanders has been great rebutting the GOP Trumpcare tax cut scam.

Is there any really hard proof of a Snowden crime beyond those subjective oaths he took when hired?

You have a point that his intelligence and charm have nothing to do with him being a traitor or not. But to me, the loud calls for his execution and incarceration seem rather Trumpian.

[pnwmom]

8. I am NOT calling for his "execution and incarceration." But since he isn't willing

to stand trial in the US, his only trial is in "the court of public opinion."

And, yes, there is hard proof. He hacked the files to his laptops and traveled with them. He admitted what he'd done to a newspaper in Hong Kong, which published some of the documents. He's never denied what he did. He just wants us to accept his excuses.

[uponit7771]

19. we ....DO... know about "that" and so does Nance and it's why Snowden is a traitor

[nilesobek]

108. Has anyone been killed or harmed as a result of his actions?

Has he been convicted of anything yet? I think the nature of the charges and allegations coupled with the players bother people more than the severity of the crime, if any.

Putin must be struggling with the fact that Snowden was funneled into their hands by the West. Maybe suspect double agent. Why are so many Democrats, who are usually in favor of due process, have become the preliminary judges? If it wasn't Snowden and Russia there would be an outcry from the same wing of the party, saying, "let's wait and see, the devil is in the details.

[uponit7771]

112. Yes America's democracy

[FarPoint]

129. I sense that there may indeed have been a murder or two...

Putin has a long trail of sudden deaths for journalist and members of his Mafia...Snowden was saving his own behind..."so be it" concept in his mind...

[LanternWaste]

114. On the other hand, his being held as a Tin God to so many seems rather Lord Haw Haw-ian.

"the loud calls for his execution and incarceration seem rather Trumpian..."

On the other hand, his being held as a Tin God to so many seems rather Lord Haw Haw-ian.

Both sentiments being little more than six of one, half a dozen of the other... and accurately illustrating our own biases rather than that of those we presume to interpret.

[delisen]

6. AFAIK Sanders did not help other NSA whistleblowers

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/6-brave-govt-whistleblowers-charged-under-espionage-act-obamas-administration

Snowden was aware about what happen to the other.

Going to Russia seems to have been his last resort, as US was threatening his other choices and his option for travel by air were curtailed. US went all out to get him.

What would you think sanders or Warren would have doe for him?

[pnwmom]

9. None of those cases was comparable. Nobody divulged info to Sen. Sanders, Warren,

or any relevant Committee head. that's what I'm saying he should have done.

[delisen]

13. What did you think Sanders or Warren would have done?

[uponit7771]

20. Given Snowden true wb status for unveiling new info on laws being broke

[delisen]

25. How does a senator give an employee of the executive branch whistleblower

status? A senator could give a press conference but I do not see Sanders doing that in 2013 with a Democratic administration in power. I don't think Sanders would have been able to prevent Snowden's arrest.

During his campaign and after the fact Sanders was approving of Snowden, seems somewhat less so now.

It was a campaign issue and Clinton had been disapproving of Snowden and certainly the administration was.

[msanthrope]

30. It's called the whistle blowers Protection act of 1988...

Had Snowden followed the law, and disclosed to the relevant Senators, he would have been able to claim true protected status.

[JCanete]

33. The question is would he have gotten it. It's hard to begrudge someone who doesn't trust the

government that is breaking the law to follow the law.

[msanthrope]

35. Why wouldn't he? If he had taken he time to consult with an actual lawyer, as

opposed to Glenn Greenwald, whose licence is suspended, he would have benefitted under the law.

One cannot flee justice and claim it.

[JCanete]

41. as others have pointed out here, whistleblowers have been screwed before. Your trust in government

authority is touching, but scary.

[msanthrope]

46. Sorry, but no one said patriotism was easy. One cannot draw a salary from the government

and then complain when they are expected to follow the law.

[JCanete]

51. the law of the land, or the law that contradicts it? You know they are sworn to follow the law of

the land right? How would you navigate that?

[msanthrope]

54. They are sworn to follow the Constitution. There's a difference. Patriots stay and fight for the

Constitution. Cowards run.

[LanternWaste]

115. As is your faith in Tin Gods.

"Your trust in government authority is touching, but scary....


As is your faith in Tin Gods. But you'll certainly rationalize a distinction lacking a difference to better validate your bias. It will most likely be both creative and bemusing...

[delisen]

67. Actually one can flee "justice" and claim it through negotiation.

[msanthrope]

71. No....under the 6th amendment, you cannot both flee Justice and

claim it. Fugitives have no custodial rights.

[delisen]

85. Plea bargain. done all the time.

[msanthrope]

92. Yes....once you show up for your arraignment. Let us know when Snowden gets brave enough. nt

[delisen]

133. Actually some fugitives make arrangements prior to showing up nt

[msanthrope]

134. Name a federal fugitive who made a pre-cusrodial please deal. nt

[delisen]

66. Yes and why did it not protect the NSA whistleblowers before him who went to

the channels?

[msanthrope]

70. Who went to Congress? nt

[delisen]

88. Drake, Binney and Wiebe:Ignored the Retaliated Against

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/16/snowden-whistleblower-nsa-officials-roundtable/2428809/


When a National Security Agency contractor revealed top-secret details this month on the government's collection of Americans' phone and Internet records, one select group of intelligence veterans breathed a sigh of relief.

Thomas Drake, William Binney and J. Kirk Wiebe belong to a select fraternity: the NSA officials who paved the way.

For years, the three whistle-blowers had told anyone who would listen that the NSA collects huge swaths of communications data from U.S. citizens. They had spent decades in the top ranks of the agency, designing and managing the very data-collection systems they say have been turned against Americans. When they became convinced that fundamental constitutional rights were being violated, they complained first to their superiors, then to federal investigators, congressional oversight committees and, finally, to the news media.

To the intelligence community, the trio are villains who compromised what the government classifies as some of its most secret, crucial and successful initiatives. They have been investigated as criminals and forced to give up careers, reputations and friendships built over a lifetime.

Today, they feel vindicated.

[msanthrope]

90. Thank you for proving my point.....these brave men didn't run, and were vindicated. Snowden took

Putin cash. He isn't fit to be listed with those patriots.

[delisen]

102. I did not prove your point. They were punished, shamed and

materially damaged for being truthful and standing up for America. They themselves felt vindicated by Snowden's daring to put himself at risk for telling the truth.

Governments, like corporations are made up of people and many of those people are unfortunately willing to follow orders and do thing that are illegal and result in harm to the citizenry. The NSA while blowers were
were not the only public servant who knew we were being betrayed and lied to about it---they were among the few willing to be honest and tell us.

Democracy depend upon truth.

[msanthrope]

105. Patriotism isn't easy. You really think any of those men are happy with Snowden's collusion

with Putin? Snowden is a coward who cut and ran.

[JCanete]

121. Ellsberg has said in no unclear terms that Snowden is a Patriot and hero for what he did.

So there's one in his corner, off the top of my head. Maybe we should both look into the others to see just how surprised we might be by their feelings on the matter, rather than just spouting assumptions about how they think about it.

[delisen]

23. Others Before Snowden went to Congress and suffered vicious retaliation. Snowden knew their fate.

Three whistleblowers before Snowden went through channels and the three were discredited and destroyed, In July, 2013 Elizabeth Warren was in the Senate 6 months. Sanders was there much longer I don't know whether Sanders had any reputation as a person to go to if you are a whistle blower.

The previous whistleblowers had not found congress receptive. Snowden was aware of their fate.

Reporters are receptive. My own personal experience is that going through channels without going public results in retaliation and even going public results in retaliation but is more likely to get the information to the people and correct a bad situation.

I think government has enormous power to suppress rights and damage individuals. Getting information about wrongdoing to the public through the press and the First Amendment to the Constitution is essential to democracy.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/06/16/snowden-whistleblower-nsa-officials-roundtable/2428809/

Q: Did Edward Snowden do the right thing in going public?

William Binney: We tried to stay for the better part of seven years inside the government trying to get the government to recognize the unconstitutional, illegal activity that they were doing and openly admit that and devise certain ways that would be constitutionally and legally acceptable to achieve the ends they were really after. And that just failed totally because no one in Congress or — we couldn't get anybody in the courts, and certainly the Department of Justice and inspector general's office didn't pay any attention to it. And all of the efforts we made just produced no change whatsoever. All it did was continue to get worse and expand.

Q: So Snowden did the right thing?

Binney: Yes, I think he did.

Q: You three wouldn't criticize him for going public from the start?

J. Kirk Wiebe: Correct.

Binney: In fact, I think he saw and read about what our experience was, and that was part of his decision-making.

Wiebe: We failed, yes.

Jesselyn Radack: Not only did they go through multiple and all the proper internal channels and they failed, but more than that, it was turned against them. ... The inspector general was the one who gave their names to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution under the Espionage Act. And they were all targets of a federal criminal investigation, and Tom ended up being prosecuted — and it was for blowing the whistle.

nsa binney
(Photo: H. Darr Beiser, USA TODAY)

[Renew Deal]

16. That's because he is a criminal

And he is running from the law. Of course they are out to arrest him. He's like any other criminal.

[delisen]

26. Was Daniel Ellsberg a criminal?

[msanthrope]

36. Yes....and would have been convicted but for the skullduggery of the FBI.

Some Patriots break unjust laws. And they pay the price.

[JCanete]

42. but we should be there to support them goddammit. They shouldn't have to pay that price if we

can prevent it. WTF?

I accept that they were brave for taking that risk...for going into it with their eyes open. I do not accept that "that's just the way it is. Tough luck."

[msanthrope]

45. Snowden didn't wait for support. He fled. That's what cowards do. nt

[JCanete]

49. um...no. Cowards don't throw their lives in turmoil and risk the consequence of prison.

Snowden absolutely risked that. That logic is strange. Must somebody jump on the grenade to be brave, or can he just go into combat to fight for what he believes is right?

[msanthrope]

55. Nope.....Snowden is living on the Russian government's dime, evading charges. Coward. nt

[JCanete]

57. That is just such slight analysis. You could not apply it to any other circumstance and you know it.

By your metric so many people who have put themselves on the line to do the right thing would still be cowards because they didn't do more than risk. They didn't fall on the sword. They didn't become the martyr. That is maybe worth thinking about?

[msanthrope]

60. He gambled, and got a Russian payout. nt

[JCanete]

62. so now he gambled...before he was a coward. What is your game? nt

[msanthrope]

63. He is a traitor who took Putin money. Like Michael Flynn. nt

[JCanete]

65. I just appreciate that you've given up the coward crap. That's progress. nt

[msanthrope]

74. Oh no.....he's a coward. And a traitor. Same funding source as Flynn. nt

[JCanete]

75. so very cohesive! Not contradictory at all. nt

[msanthrope]

77. Same funding source as Michael Flynn. Think about that. nt

[JCanete]

78. I will when I'm thinking about an entirely different claim that you are making. nt

[delisen]

86. guilt by association

[snooper2]

79. you can't prevent anything you are on a random message board

[JCanete]

80. public sentiment matters. Attempting to erode support for whistleblowers in the court of public

opinion has an effect. Even if we were talking about what other people should be doing, accepting with a kind of easy smugness that "that's what you get for being a hero" is kind of worth examining.

[LanternWaste]

116. I too often pretend the opinions of others is merely an attempt to erode faith

I too often pretend the opinions of others is merely an attempt to erode faith in whistle blowers rather than what they actually are... criticism of Tin Gods held in golden esteem.

Tin Gods we righteously deny criticism of, because faith matters more than justice to a lazy mind.

[JCanete]

118. well that was convincing. I'm not calling Snowden a god, and I'm shy of calling him a hero

because I don't know his motivations. I don't care. The greater evil is when our government does something that undermines our democracy. That we cannot let stand. You can carry on with your straw manning.

[Renew Deal]

52. Was Chelsea Manning?

[Renew Deal]

15. It's not just what you think of him but what he did.

He committed traitorous acts and continues to do so. That makes him a traitor that should be prosecuted as such.

[uponit7771]

17. Wikileaks has a Russian based server address

[Adrahil]

109. Do you deny....

That Snowden released information on perfectly legal foreign intelligence operations? 'Cause he did ya know....

[nilesobek]

113. No denial that he exposed operations that were lied about in hearings under oath.

He should turn himself in. No one can run forever and he should be worried that the Russians may think he's doing a junk document dump on behalf of the USA.

Time to come home Eddy.

[denbot]

4. Just another treasonous bastard..

One of many.

[delisen]

7. I think Snowden was a whistleblower, not a traitor.

US prevented Snowden's many attempts to go to countries other than Russia.

Snowden left the US because he was well aware of what had happened to other whistleblowers. US went all out
to keep other countries from letting Snowden into their countries.

For Snowden Russia was a last resort.

[uponit7771]

21. This is false... Snowden could've done similar to assange but went to Russia via China as a primary

[delisen]

24. Facts? Snowden wanted asylum elsewhere-couldn't get it-US prevented.

Assange claimed he arranged Russia for Snowden. If you remember many on the left considered Assange and Wikileaks heroic at the time.

Snowden had gone to Hong Kong but was not allowed to stay there. US let other countries know we would retaliate if asylum was given.

He had few options. US pressured European countries to land any plane Snowden was on. If UD apprehended Snowden then he would have been given the same treatment Manning has gotten.

[KittyWampus]

38. He went to the Russian embassy in Hong Kong.

[delisen]

69. That was a month after his arrival and his options had narrowed.

I don't see any evidence that he was working for Russia. I see much evidence that the US worked to prevent his seeking asylum elsewhere.

[msanthrope]

56. Had his 30th birthday party in the Russian embassy in Hong Kong. nt

[delisen]

68. That was a month after he arrived and lived with refugees.nt

I am not seeing any facts in your posts that support your judgements.

[LanternWaste]

117. You also dramatically lack any objective evidence supporting your own premise.

You also dramatically lack any objective evidence supporting your own premise.

But I realize it's important you hold yourself to a lower standard than you hold others to... tin gods such as little Eddie require that type of irrational and willful subservience from their flock. Good job, little guy!

[Adrahil]

110. He also released info on...

Legal foreign intelligence operations.

[JCanete]

10. I like nance, but that is fucking lame. Our government was betraying us. Frankly, that is traitorous

They became the enemy, foreign or domestic that citizens of America should defend against. You don't want leaks? Don't do the fucking dirt.

We can talk about whether somebody is a hero or not only AFTER the conversation is prefaced with a recognition of that fact.

[delisen]

14. We needed to know what was going on.

[uponit7771]

22. We already knew what was going on Obama told us one month before Snowden leak

That the US was gathering tons of information Snowden did not leak anything that was knew that wasn't already known by the government and the Obama Administration.

[JCanete]

29. bull. That just isn not true. Clapper literally came out and told a load of horseshit. The

Constitution is kind of supposed to mean something. It doesn't matter that the Government knows it, it matters that the people know what its government is doing, and it was violating the Fourth Amendment.

[delisen]

89. The government hid its spying on the people from the people

Clapper lied.

Our government did not inform us of what they were spying on us.

Many people who claim German citizens were guilty when following illegal orders often give citizens of their own country a pass when they do the same or retaliate against them when they speak truth.

[uponit7771]

100. Clapper lied Obama didn't, he did not... why do the Snowden detractors continue to act like

... Obama said NOTHING?!

He did!!!

He didn't tell every jot and tittle, that was not needed ... Snowden revealed little that has changed anything RIGHT NOW other than peoples awareness of the depth Obama already admitted to.

[delisen]

103. Who said anything about Obama????? Are you confusing my post with someone else's?

[randome]

31. Betraying us how? By getting FISA warrants? By being forbidden from spying within our borders?

How is any of this 'betraying us'?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]

[JCanete]

32. Collecting data on US citizens in contravention of the 4th amendment maybe...and lying about it.

The Appeals Court seemed to agree that they had overstepped their Constitutional constraints...we just weren't supposed to know about it.

[msanthrope]

37. Um.....no. Care to cite your claim? nt

[JCanete]

40. that's what you've got? come on. Phone records from our phone companies...almost all of Verizon's...

What about PRISM? Our government agencies could demand server data in secret that our tech companies were forced to comply with.

Here you go....our courts, so very notoriously anti-establishment they are...

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2015-05-07/court-backs-snowden-strikes-secret-laws


You know what's so frustrating? this is google search. Why be content to take the word of your federal agencies rather than to do a simple search on the subject?

[msanthrope]

44. You do realize that phone records do not require a warrant of any kind? Not for 40 years? nt

[JCanete]

47. courts sign off on that information as they pertain to gaining evidence to build a specific case.

They don't need a warrant but still need a court, and its still narrow. And you decided to address one single point?

[msanthrope]

48. Um, no. The police do not need a court or warrant to obtain your phone records. nt

[JCanete]

50. they have to show in retrospect that it was relevant to an ongoing investigation. They can't

blanketly take and store it all.

[msanthrope]

53. No, they don't.

I hate to point this out to you, but the appeal you cited was primarily on a standing issue. It went back to the lower court.

[JCanete]

64. It did not rule on the constitutionality. I'll go with the ACLU on that one. It ruled that it was

beyond the scope of the afforded powers...which sounds to me like breaking the law.

[msanthrope]

73. That's the claim. Let us know how it turns out. nt

[JCanete]

76. jesus, how the fuck do you feel about it, and if you don't have a problem with it, why? nt

[msanthrope]

82. I don't have a problem with Smith v. Maryland.

Tell me exactly why you think that decision is incorrrect.

[randome]

59. Phone records belong to the company that maintains them, not to individuals.

Been that way since 1970 or so. Snowden thought he was being 'clever' by 'telling' us this. Apparently some were taken in by him.

Remember the #1 thing he and Greenwald took a crack at was making PRISM out to be some sort of Internet sponge and they were wrong about that. That's when they moved onto trying to make an issue out of phone metadata.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]

[JCanete]

61. The government could demand those phone records and expect compliance. Same with PRISM. what they

thought it was was more direct access...but who gives a shit. Why is this not a problem to you? The companies were not given the right to refuse to comply or even to bring it to light that the demands were bing made.

[msanthrope]

72. No company can refuse to hand over your phone records. Been settled law for 40 years. nt

[snooper2]

81. You think that is bad, the government knows how many Snickers you bought last year

THAT is fucked up!

[JCanete]

83. Is that intended to be snarky or just funny? Frankly, it is fucked up. nt

[snooper2]

87. I know it is fucked up, my Social Security statement had an amendment showing BIG MACS!

This was from 2015, how the hell do they know I purchased 14 Big Macs throughout the year!

[randome]

84. A PRISM 'demand' is done with a warrant.

Phone records have never been personal property so sure, I don't see it as a problem since nothing has changed in the last 50 years.

Now you may disagree with the process in which a FISA warrant is issued but that's another matter. And Snowden never mentioned that as one of his concerns until all his other insinuations failed to catch on.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]

[JCanete]

94. First, there is a problem there, but if you want to say the NSA did nothing new, fine, except that

they can demand records without recourse. If it is the private property of the institution but it can't actually object that is a problem. If it decided not to object but all of this is done without the public's knowledge that this is being done, this is also a huge effing problem and is certainly a breach of the 4th spirit of the 4th amendment whether our courts see it that way or not. Third, could you point me to good documentation on the protections you are so confident in regarding PRISM? I've looked but I must just be looking in the wrong places. I'm going to remain skeptical, if not on whether or not that is true on the surface, certainly on just what that constitutes here.

[randome]

96. The 'evidence' that PRISM is not copying the Internet on a daily basis...

...is that this would require thousands of employees of Google, Microsoft, Apple, etc. to all be cooperating and not lifting a finger to protect their clients' data. What are the odds that this is happening? In addition, they have dedicated teams to go over any warrants that come their way. When they push back on something, we don't hear about it because the request is confidential in the first place. And Apple has certainly pushed back in recent years. Witness their refusal to unlock their phones.

Snowden and Greenwald jumped the shark their first time out with their 'revelations'. It was all downhill from there.

None of this is to imply that the NSA is always in the right and that abuses don't occasionally occur. Any large organization -government or otherwise- will have cracks in their systems and malfeasance practiced by unethical employees.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]

[JCanete]

98. but that much data would be pretty pointless....for a little longer anyway. having dragnetted

information and then pinpointing that down to somebody who you want to target, not necessarily for criminal malfeasance, is a problem. You say you need a warrant to do that. I don't think that's the way it would have been, or was being done.

yes corps push back, when they are afraid that their proprietary tech or info is in danger. That's reassuring. We certainly can't count on them to have a problem for other reasons, especially if they have legal cover to cooperate.

[Blue_Tires]

12. Yeah, I've been following him for awhile

[GliderGuider]

27. I'm a "reformed smoker" where "Espionage Eddy" Snowden is concerned.

I was a resolute supporter of Assange and Snowden up until 5 months ago. I realized last November that many leftists (me included) had been flim-flammed by the FSB. They leveraged our desire and ability to find fault with American institutions of authority, especially those in the Intelligence Community. That mindset made us incapable of critical thinking as both Assange and Snowden stroked our pre-existing biases.

Now Wikileaks has been definitively outed as a Russian disinfo operation, and the same thing is happening with Snowden. The FSB smokescreen is being pierced.

The bullet points at the top of the article below were what finally turned me around about Snowy the Spy. Plus the fact that he's still comfortable in Moscow - along with the fact that every time I lift another rock in this sordid affair, there's a Russian under it. I have no proof that Snowden went in dirty, but the Ecuadorean angle represents strong circumstantial evidence to me.

https://heatst.com/politics/assange-doc-suggests-russia-knew-in-advance-ed-snowden-would-spy-on-nsa/

[Linc13]

34. Snowden...

isn't staying in Russia for free. Anyone who thinks that still has their head up their asses.

[KittyWampus]

39. Snowden isn't staying alive for "free". He is owned.

[JCanete]

43. Perhaps we shouldn't have been breaking the law. I'm sure he's not happy where he is. nt

[delisen]

97. I don't see the proof of that. He is in a bad position. He

probably made the same mistaken assumptions about Wikileaks that many on the left had made--before Assange showed his hand.

for the time being Snowden is trapped.

James Clapper however is free and probably enjoying a generous person despite lying to Sen Wyden and Congress about the fact he was engaging in exactly what Snowden accused him of- spying on us.

Remember the testimony in Congress:


In March 2013, James Clapper testified under oath about NSA monitoring US citizens.

Wyden: “I hope we can do this in just a yes or no answer, because I know Sen. Feinstein wants to move on. Last summer, the NSA director (Keith Alexander) was at a conference and he was asked a question about the NSA surveillance of Americans. He replied, and I quote here, ‘The story that we have millions, or hundreds of millions, of dossiers on people is completely false.’ The reason I’m asking the question is, having served on the committee now for a dozens years, I don’t really know what a dossier is in this context. So, what I wanted to see if you could give me a yes or no answer to the question: Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions, or hundreds of millions of Americans?”

Clapper: “No, sir.”

Wyden: “It does not?”

Clapper: “Not wittingly. There are cases where they could inadvertently, perhaps, collect, but not wittingly.”

Later Clapper had to admit to his lie.

What Clapper and the NSA did was wrong. As a citizen I want to know When government over reaches. Democracy depends on truth. Snowden told the truth.

The consent of the people is important.

[Linc13]

135. No.

I`m buying the `Poor misunderstood hero Snowden`Shtick as much as I bought the `Poor Julian, he is such a misunderstood hero shtick.

He's part of the Putin circle jerk just like Trump and Assange.

[stonecutter357]

58. Snowden is KGB all the way! he does not want clemency his home.

[delisen]

91. Actually he wants to return-just doesn't want the Manning treatment.

Assange is a Russian tool and an enemy of democracy and the Democratic Party.

Snowden is neither.

[stonecutter357]

93. Bull crap Snowden is a Russian tool just like Assange.

[delisen]

95. I don't see evidence of that. these are 2 distinct people

with different history, character, and aims.

[stonecutter357]

104. 2 distinct people with aims that mirrors putin/trump.

[delisen]

107. I have not seen evidence that they have the same aim, not some assertions.

[uponit7771]

101. +1, I'm wondering who the fuck is arguing that this guy didn't proper fuck America good

[KittyWampus]

106. LCP's/ Low count posters.

[JCanete]

119. That's nonsense, and dismissive using reasons entirely devoid of content. nt

[Tarheel_Dem]

111. I'm sure more Americans agree with Malcolm than agree with Snowden. Last poll I saw showed

that all of Greenwald's efforts to rehabilitate Snowden's image were a big fat FAIL. Americans think he should be returned home, and stand trial for his treachery. During the Bush years he thought "leakers should be shot in the balls", but had a change of heart under Obama? He's a Russian asset now. Let them have him.

[JCanete]

120. Well that means something, given than the American public has never been wrong about shit before. nt

[Tarheel_Dem]

122. It means exactly what Malcolm says it means: "Snowden's a traitor".

[JCanete]

123. the American public's opinion absolutely does not mean that. nt

[Tarheel_Dem]

124. Your circular argument style doesn't phase me. I am not the one.

Poll: Most think Edward Snowden should stand trial in U.S.


Most Americans – 61 percent - think Snowden should have to stand trial in the United States for his actions. Far fewer – 23 percent - think he should be granted amnesty. Republicans, Democrats, and independents all agree on this as well.

Meanwhile, 31 percent approve of Snowden’s actions, while most, 54 percent, disapprove. Majorities of Republicans, Democrats, and independents disapprove.

Americans are divided as to the impact on the country from making the NSA program public. While 40 percent think the disclosure has been good for the country, 46 percent think it has been bad.

When asked to come up with a word that describes Edward Snowden, nearly a quarter volunteer either traitor or a similar word that questions his loyalty to his country, while 8 percent say he is “brave” or “courageous” or “a hero”. Just 2 percent volunteered that he is a patriot or patriotic, and another 2 percent say “terrorist”.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-most-think-edward-snowden-should-stand-trial-in-us/

[JCanete]

125. I don't care. When Oliver's crew asked people on the street who Snowden was, the results were

depressing. You think that a prominent effort to undermine a whistleblower by the state and the corporate media doesn't affect public opinion when they barely even know who the person is?

The fact that you would even cite public opinion on something as evidence of its truth is frightening...no, terrifying.

[Tarheel_Dem]

130. What's actually terrifying is that you're here defending a traitor. That scares me more than a poll.

And what scares me even more about Snowden is his support for Trump, and the fact that he's wrong now, just as he's always been.

Link to tweet

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028796782

[JCanete]

131. I'm refusing to entertain that conversation with anybody who first whitewashes

our government's actions, for which Snowden's whistleblowing was necessary in the service of our democracy. His motivations, even if entirely nefarious, are secondary to whether or not we let our government do shit that undermines our Constitution.

His assessment of the 2016 election is his business and perfectly stupid, since it has never been unclear whether Goldman Sachs would be okay with Trump in the White House, but that doesn't take away from the import of the exposure of NSA activity.

[Tarheel_Dem]

132. And his previous proclamation, under Bush/Cheney that "leakers should be shot in the balls"?