General Discussion

Rex

(65,616 posts)

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

Wed Apr 8, 2015, 03:05 PM

Apr 2015

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.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

139 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

4 reasons I'm thankful for Ed Snowden [View all] MannyGoldstein Apr 2015 OP

As we go forward...I bet it will be revealed that there's more that FOUR! K&R KoKo Apr 2015 #1

Anyone with even a moderate level of respect for the Constitution Maedhros Apr 2015 #2

Most people don't care YoungDemCA Apr 2015 #3

Seems that way RobertEarl Apr 2015 #7

No doubt that he was. zeemike Apr 2015 #14

(Fixed) Majority of people don't even know who Snowden is... TerrapinFlyer Apr 2015 #30

I'll bet that more Europeans know Snowden's name than Americans. bvar22 Apr 2015 #31

And yet, a majority of Americans polled believe that Snowden is a Whistle Blower NOT a sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #35

"And yet..."? The majority of Americans don't know who he is! Who is spinning? TerrapinFlyer Apr 2015 #37

Did you know that this is an adult forum? sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #84

Thank you for this post. The entire nation owes a debt to Snowden. woo me with science Apr 2015 #4

Thanks, woo me locks Apr 2015 #8

That interview was PRICELESS. Brilliant and Snowden was excellent, couldn't have been better if sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #36

+1 merrily Apr 2015 #51

thanks to you too, Manny grasswire Apr 2015 #5

Orwellian free-fall to fascism. nt Scrabbleddie Apr 2015 #6

You would not be a good purveyor of Democracy. randome Apr 2015 #9

The majority of U.S. citizens don't know squat about a lot of things. Luminous Animal Apr 2015 #13

. Rex Apr 2015 #24

Oliver's entire point was that we have not made an informed judgement on the subject, Marr Apr 2015 #25

So - Democracy means Snowden just just keep quiet, because you don't care? djean111 Apr 2015 #27

It's not just me who doesn't care what the NSA does with foreign communications. randome Apr 2015 #28

And you are upset because he gave an interview to a comedian on HBO and you were forced djean111 Apr 2015 #29

Who's upset? Just expressing my opinion, that's all. randome Apr 2015 #49

For someone who claims he doesn't care, bvar22 Apr 2015 #32

It's an interesting subject. randome Apr 2015 #50

Which, being such a small sample size, may be an obstacle towards objectivity. LanternWaste Apr 2015 #56

Of course, but at least I'm willing to admit that. randome Apr 2015 #59

Democracy is a form of government and no one stopped you from saying you don't care. merrily Apr 2015 #53

True, Democracy isn't the same as 'majority rules'. randome Apr 2015 #57

What you are basically saying is that most USians don't know and don't care. That really has nothing merrily Apr 2015 #58

Sure it does. We are in control of who our representatives are and what they do in our name. randome Apr 2015 #63

How does not knowing or caring who Snowden is mesh with controlling our representatives? merrily Apr 2015 #68

Yeah, well, that's more of a concept than reality, admittedly. (But I'm still sweet.) randome Apr 2015 #74

Oh, you'll think it's a "fair assessment" 10 years from now. elias49 Apr 2015 #87

DU is just a way to practice my debating skills. randome Apr 2015 #135

IOW, being ignorant about Snowden and the 4th Am. really has nothing to do with democracy or merrily Apr 2015 #94

I'm not saying that people are ignorant. randome Apr 2015 #131

You're perfectly fine to tell the government that you don't care if they violate your Erich Bloodaxe BSN Apr 2015 #136

this thread.. navarth Apr 2015 #10

5. He showed the lengths "our" government will go to stifle dissent and whistleblowers. Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2015 #11

I want Snowden to father my children. Buzz Clik Apr 2015 #12

The FSB, ISIS and China's Ministry of State Security are equally grateful Blue_Tires Apr 2015 #15

And what did they learn from Mr. Snowden MannyGoldstein Apr 2015 #17

Start here: Blue_Tires Apr 2015 #39

That's all you have? Oh snap. elias49 Apr 2015 #88

There's plenty more, but I'm not doing your research for you Blue_Tires Apr 2015 #89

I'm quite happy with Mr Snowden. elias49 Apr 2015 #90

It's not the responsibiity of anyone but you to do research to prove a claim you made. merrily Apr 2015 #96

Only the average American learned the things to which you linked. merrily Apr 2015 #95

"Islamic extremists are locked in a digital arms race with our intelligence services" ronnie624 Apr 2015 #100

Snowden gave NOTHING to those you claim. bvar22 Apr 2015 #33

But they have all benefited from the leaks Blue_Tires Apr 2015 #38

Thanks for retracting the false claim regarding who Snowden gave the documents to. sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #40

I've never said he gave documents to anyone Blue_Tires Apr 2015 #43

If Snowden "indisputably showed files to some unnamed Chinese officials ", bvar22 Apr 2015 #45

there's a difference between "showed" and "handed over" Blue_Tires Apr 2015 #139

The US Government FORCED Snowden to be trapped in Russia. And give me some credible sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #92

Wonder if he helped Russia with their hacking???? nt kelliekat44 Apr 2015 #41

I wouldn't speculate that far, but Blue_Tires Apr 2015 #44

Tin Foil Hat time! bvar22 Apr 2015 #46

Insult away...Gimmie your best cracks... Blue_Tires Apr 2015 #48

Conspiracy theories belong in the speculation forum. sabrina 1 Apr 2015 #93

I'm thankful for Snowden, too. RufusTFirefly Apr 2015 #16

Snowden Laid To Rest - Once And For All Time - That Our Government Cannot Be Trusted - Ever cantbeserious Apr 2015 #18

Very appropriate for a cemetary or War Memorial. bvar22 Apr 2015 #47

I will not paint a Halo on Snowden, but DonCoquixote Apr 2015 #19

I'm thankful for those very reasons too. My favorite thing about him Autumn Apr 2015 #20

It's a small consolation in lieu of having leaders who are honest and honorable, who have the GoneFishin Apr 2015 #21

He does make the authoritarians foam at the mouth. Which is both sad and entertaining. Rex Apr 2015 #26

They have become pathetic parodies of themselves. bvar22 Apr 2015 #34

This message was self-deleted by its author Corruption Inc Apr 2015 #22

Citizen Four also clearly pointed out... Oilwellian Apr 2015 #23

Technically, 'lack of standing' rather than 'lack of proof.' Maedhros Apr 2015 #138

Lying to Congress was apparently fine with Congress. No investigation, msanthrope Apr 2015 #42

Agree totally, I didn't expect the WH to spank the CIA/NSA for bad behavior. Rex Apr 2015 #52

Which suggests that Senator Wyden understood that he asked a question that msanthrope Apr 2015 #55

Was General CLapper under oath that day he testified before Senator Wyden? bvar22 Apr 2015 #60

You do realize that a lie under oath isn't necessarily perjury, right? Which is why msanthrope Apr 2015 #65

Well, at least that is a step forward for you, bvar22 Apr 2015 #67

He may have. It doesn't matter though, does it, as Wyden and Congress msanthrope Apr 2015 #70

Do you really claim to know what Wyden et al were THINKING? bvar22 Apr 2015 #72

I wouldn't trust either one with a wooden nickle. I know mis has no love for Snowden. Rex Apr 2015 #75

I don't support Clapper. I'm just telling you what the law is. If you think Wyden was pressured by msanthrope Apr 2015 #99

Lying to Congress is against the law. merrily Apr 2015 #101

Indeed--one wonders why Congress didn't pursue the remedy they have at hand if they thought msanthrope Apr 2015 #102

Same thing could be said about the D of J. merrily Apr 2015 #103

Why would the DOJ usurp Congress? You have the process reversed. nt msanthrope Apr 2015 #107

It would not have been usurpation. They both had the ability. And Clapper is Obama's employee. merrily Apr 2015 #109

The DOJ cannot act in this matter without a referral. Also, the Congress declined to msanthrope Apr 2015 #114

True, well I don't think the POTUS should have to run the country by himself. Rex Apr 2015 #61

Obama does NOT do everything himslef. bvar22 Apr 2015 #64

When I say the POTUS, I mean his cabinet and advisers etc.. Rex Apr 2015 #66

His choices for cabinet... bvar22 Apr 2015 #71

You can't really say "no comment" when you are testifying. I think Clapper handled msanthrope Apr 2015 #69

Well 'imperial presidency' is a silly term that I hope nobody uses here on DU. Rex Apr 2015 #73

You won't find the words "Imperial Presidency" here. bvar22 Apr 2015 #78

Well sadly I resigned to the fact that all of that is over the heads of our upper level managers. Rex Apr 2015 #80

Wrong again, bvar22 Apr 2015 #76

What, precisely, is wrong? No.....you cannot say "No Comment" when testifying. msanthrope Apr 2015 #77

You can't say "no comment", bvar22 Apr 2015 #81

No--I don't support lying under oath. Not in any form. But it happens, and when it does, I msanthrope Apr 2015 #97

He doesn't. Clapper works for him, though. merrily Apr 2015 #106

Or maybe Wyden understood he asked a question to which Americans deserved an answer. merrily Apr 2015 #104

Wow--thanks autospeak--that should have read "DOJ notification." msanthrope Apr 2015 #111

Again, huh? merrily Apr 2015 #113

Are you unfamiliar with the process? nt msanthrope Apr 2015 #115

What process? merrily Apr 2015 #117

The process of prosecuting Clapper, right? I assume you would want him prosecuted, right? Now, msanthrope Apr 2015 #121

I understand the processes of DEALING with Clapper, if anyone wanted to deal with him. merrily Apr 2015 #125

So you want him "dealt" with, but not prosecuted? nt msanthrope Apr 2015 #127

Now, you're twisting words. You can read and your profession includes dealing precisely with words, merrily Apr 2015 #128

I am asking you what you want. A prosecution? nt msanthrope Apr 2015 #129

I did want a discussion. Apparently, that's not on the table, as usual. See you another time. merrily Apr 2015 #130

I am trying to have an honest discussion with you, but that's impossible if you refuse msanthrope Apr 2015 #132

Not true, but, again, this is way too boring and pointless for us to continue. merrily Apr 2015 #133

You started this discussion with me, merrily...and not for anything, but leaving the msanthrope Apr 2015 #134

Still can't believe Manny is beating this "clapper lied" dead horse. joshcryer Apr 2015 #79

Because what Clapper said was a lie? Octafish Apr 2015 #82

Yeah, but saying Obama is fine with liars. joshcryer Apr 2015 #83

So why state Clapper did not lie? Octafish Apr 2015 #85

I did not say that. joshcryer Apr 2015 #86

What is clearly true is that Clapper's lies were acceptable (or close to) to anyone merrily Apr 2015 #137

Those who would question Obaman's moral charatcer on this issue are ignorant of civics, or, even msanthrope Apr 2015 #98

Because civics teaches it's okay to lie to Congress? merrily Apr 2015 #105

Civics teaches you that this is purview of Congress. nt msanthrope Apr 2015 #108

Not at all. If so, it's a really lame civics course. merrily Apr 2015 #110

Actually, yes. It's called keeping the branches of gov't seperate. Congress declined to msanthrope Apr 2015 #112

Which branch employs Clapper? "I serve at the pleasure of the President." merrily Apr 2015 #116

Yes--and if Congress declines to investigate, what, precisely, is the Executive supposed to msanthrope Apr 2015 #119

What he is supposed to do is a different issue from what he can do. Separation of powers does NOT merrily Apr 2015 #120

Well--upthread you don't seem to be able to answer what you want Clapper prosecuted for. How about msanthrope Apr 2015 #122

So far, my posts are not the ones that need help. merrily Apr 2015 #123

I'm asking you upthread what you want. Please answer that upthread. nt msanthrope Apr 2015 #124

I just did. merrily Apr 2015 #126

and if you're the head of a powerful spy agency, you can get neverforget Apr 2015 #118

i would rather know about the spying than not know about it. merrily Apr 2015 #54

Excellent op. k&r. nt. NCTraveler Apr 2015 #62

Recommend! KoKo Apr 2015 #91