The vast majority of DU supports Snowden's and Greenwald's actions

[MADem]

288. Snowden had--so he insists--capabilities that other whistleblowers did not have.

If you don't think he couldn't have waltzed into Feinstein's office and told her "You're being spied on, I can prove it" and then did just that, that she wouldn't give him more than a hearing, but she would have gone on a rampage, and used every fiber of her being to protect him, I don't know what to tell you.

You do know that anything a Senator says on the Senate floor is pretty much protected speech? People seem to forget that. This whole nonsense about not being able to talk about stuff is just not supported.

If Snowden actually had "the goods," he could have gotten help. It's becoming obvious that he didn't try very hard to go through channels--he couldn't even be bothered to put his concerns in writing, and get replies to them, from his superiors.

Again, if he coughs up the emails he sent, and the names of the people to whom he sent them, I'll revise my view. But to not put concerns in writing is Amateur Hour.

It makes his claims of being the Knight in Shining Armor appear less likely, not more. More and more, I'm starting to think this is more about his EGO and how HE thinks things should be done, and less about his efforts to work within the system to make change.

What Snowden is doing, I think, is mixing truth with fiction, overstating his importance and capabilities, and flat-out prevaricating about the steps he took to intervene in what he thought was a troublesome set of practices by NSA and the rest of the intel community.

If he really complained to superiors, where are his copies of the letters of complaint? Where are the emails expressing his concerns? This guy isn't a child--he's a thirty year old adult who told Brian Williams that he was a "spy"--surely he knows that verbal orders don't "go" when you're trying to nail down an issue of legality?