. @SenatorBennet starts yelling at Tulsi Gabbard after she refuses to dance the jig he requested.
— Mel (@Villgecrazylady) January 30, 2025
You’re right Mike, that isn’t a difficult question to answer; Ed Snowden is not only NOT a traitor, Ed Snowden is an American hero.
Something you Senate swine know nothing about. pic.twitter.com/KYpusWdeC4
January 30, 2025
"After being pressed by senators from both parties to call Edward Snowden a traitor, Tulsi Gabbard repeatedly refused during her confirmation hearing on Thursday morning...."
"'This is a big deal to everybody here, because its a big deal to everybody you'll also oversee,' said Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), who has publicly said he supports her nomination. 'So, was Edward Snowden a traitor?'Gabbard would not give a yes or no answer, saying only that she is 'committed if confirmed as Director of National Intelligence to join you in making sure that there is no future Snowden-type leak.' Lankford asked a second time if Snowden was a traitor, to which Gabbard responded,'I am focused on the future and how we can prevent something like this from happening again.'... Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) pounced on the moment, pressing her in a heated back and forth immediately after to say that Snowden is a traitor.... When she began answering without a yes or no, he interrupted, 'This is when the rubber hits the road. This is not a moment for social media.'..."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
136 comments:
“This is a big deal to everybody here, because its a big deal to the people who have dirt on us.”
I would look it up, but I suspect thanks to this line of questioning, it will take time to find an answer. Does anyone know if Edward Snowden was convicted in absence by officials as a traitor? Why should see call him a traitor if no Congress or US Court has called him a traitor? Do these Senators actually want the Executive Branch to have sole discretion on the ability to label an US citizen as a traitor?
One man's traitor is another man's unnamed source
Michael Bennett(D) - hated by every non-leftist in CO.
Snowden uncovered insider spying corruption. Both parties hate that.
There were many traitors in that hearing chamber. Gabbard had the good sense to refuse to call them out as well.
The National Intelligence Complex (NIC) is still alive and kicking. Snowden absolutely betrayed is TS clearance, something hundreds if not thousands of regime apparatchiks did during Biden's administration and have never been held accountable for. Their real beef with Snowden was the things he revealed were and should be very concerning to the American public. Snowden might be a criminal, but he's not a traitor. That should be reserved for the 51 ex-intelligence officials that signed their names to a certifiably false statement.
Tulsi had her smoking touch-of-gray highlights at the hearing today...like a slightly older and sexier Rogue from X-Men. Hnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnngg.
I need to find a tactful way of getting my wife to do this.
Personally, I would've said "he's a traitor" just to get through the hearing. But the question of whether he's a "Traitor" or "less than a traitor" is irrelevant, and has nothing to do with whether she is qualified.
Again, the Uniparty wants to dictate to Trump who he can serve in his cabinet. People like Collins, Lisa Murkey, and McConnell all voted for Biden's most extreme leftwing picks because "The POTUS has a right to pick his own men".
Now, they're joining with the Democrats to stop Trump from picking his own men.
I noticed that it was their main line if not only line of attack. I'm not sure why she was so reluctant to answer the question. She did reiterate several times that she was committed to protect whistle blowers, which seemed a pretty weak excuse for Snowden imo. She did iterate she was committed to making sure people like Snowden didn't have security clearances that allowed the damage, but again pretty weak. The Syria shit attacks on her were just the samo samo stuff.
The Uniparty hates Snoweden. So Tulsi is supposed to hate him too. Nothing to do with the job she's nominated for. These senate clowns are playing to the big donors.
Maybe she could have brought up Feinstein having a Chinese spy on her staff for 10 years, and nobody saying boo about it.
Edward Snowden is a traitor.
BTW, I'm available for the DNI job.
Get her the whole regimen of kids vaccines and it will happen of its own accord.
The guy is smart, well-meaning, and unbalanced. And a traitor. Putin can have him.
I would have responded, "Senator, do you want the DNI to have the authority to determine who is and who is not a traitor without due process?"
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
-- Article III, Section 3 of the United States Constitution
In the USA, you are INNOCENT, until PROVEN guilty
So, NO.. NO he is NOT a Traitor, because he has not been found guilty of Treason.
he has not been found guilty of Treason, because he hasn't been charged with Treason.
Snowden was charged with conveying classified information to an unauthorized party, disclosing communications intelligence information, and theft of government property.
The real traitors are the ones condoning illegal behavior by the US Government. Not the ones uncovering it.
Lankford is an idiot for throwing the T word around like that. No CHARGE of treason, no plea no trial. The answer Tulsi is "Fuck no, he's not a traitor."
Tulsi has attributed it to PTSD. Have you though of traumatizing your wife to affect this hair color?
Exactly! you can't be a traitor, unless you have been found guilty in a court of law.
MANY people here might "think' that gilbar is/was a drug dealing dope trafficer;
but since gilbar has never even been CHARGED with any of those crimes (which he May (or May NOT) have committed); it would be slander (or libel?) to say that he is those things
That would've been better than her answer.
Well put.
uha- yes!
I've been watching her hearings on CSPAN. like Tulsi. I wanted Trump to name her as his vice president. She's smart and articulate. But watching her today, I'm not certain that I would vote to confirm. Maybe....but not certain.
I don't know what is behind her strategy to which she obdurately adhered, but I don't see why she could not simply agree that Snowden is a traitor. Nor would she explain when asked what her thought process was when she introduced a bill in the House that would, to some extent, pardon Snowden.
As I say, I like Tulsi, but I could well understand it if they vote her down.
- Krumhorn
Lol, I'm trying to find tactful ways to convince my wife to fulfill my Tulsi fantasy Bob, not give her autism.
These are the same revelations the times the post and journal won pulitzers for
The only reason the want to vote her down is because she LEFT the corrupt democrat party.
They seem to think if they call Snowden a traitor they don’t have to address the violations he exposed.
...and I thought that Sen. Kelly made an excellent point about her analytical skills during his questioning about Syrian gassing. She could easily have said that politicians regularly say and do stupid partisan things, but as DNI, she would have a far different job.
- Krumhorn
I want her in - because Hillary's corrupt head will explode.
Well…how bad do you want it?
I think RideSpaceMountain is on the right track on this question. Here's how she should have answered it:
"Senator, according to the then-current laws, Mr. Snowden committed a criminal act. However, the issue of whether he was a "traitor" needs to be judged in a wider context, including his motivation for doing so. If he did it for the purpose of exposing things that the country needed to know in order to correct corruption or unjust and secret but illegal practices, then one couldn't say he had traitorous intentions to harm this country. Daniel Ellsberg and others have similarly chosen to act as whistleblowers in past cases. I therefore cannot assert traitorous intent on Mr. Snowden's actions at this time, in spite of the fact they did indeed break the law. I have nothing further to add on this question."
"This is not a moment for social media.'..." said the man hoping his comment will go viral on social media.
"Tulsi has attributed it to PTSD. Have you though of traumatizing your wife to affect this hair color?"
Kinky.
Our government of late seems to like throwing around words like treason and insurrection, disregarding the fact these words have specific legal definitions.
It is not up to the personal opinion of anyone whether Snowden is guilty or should be so charged. However, if careless use be all the rage, perhaps those who so carelessly charge thees serious crimes are the real traitors and insurrectionists.
Article III Section 3 TreasonClause 1 Meaning
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
Conviction is not subject to democratic vote or popular consensus.
Unauthorized disclosure of classified info well wouldnt all the publications that published snowdens material be liable
...pretty bad. Are there any drugs you can slip into someone's coffee that do it?
The cabinet position is not appointed under DEI, popularity contest, or any other class-disordered ideological reference.
Hillary's email server would have resulted in a lost TS clearance and prison time for the average person. Yet, the apparatchik in charge said "no reasonable prosecutor" would bring a case.
Crossfire Hurricane would have resulted in...
Interference in an election by consciously lying about Hunter's laptop would have...
Reasonable = "amoral allies who protect me at this time."
I need to find a tactful way of getting my wife to do this.
Spider bite on the scalp...
Tulsi sticks to her guns and doesn't bow down. She abandoned the Democratic Party for her principles, and made it seem reasonable for women to not vote D. So, they suppress her to keep anxiety-driven pro-abortion female voters anxious.
How many times did clapper lie undee oath why wasnt he punished
Snowden exposed the asshats who decided a 'national emergency' allowed them to vacuum up everyones cell data, internet data. He's a hero.
These hearings are an embarrassment. United States senate is composed of idiots, fools, and some of the stupidest humans on earth.
Can we just throw them all in the street? Doesn't seem to matter which party they claim to support, they are just a bunch of cheap liars and crooks, with the mental ability of a child.
It was a coded instruction for this exchange to be the main talking point on the legacy TV and print media outlets he still controls or influences.
Biden and AOC were "sickened" to see a...racist bully(?)...border patrol officer twirl his reins to control a horse. Sickened they said!
These hearings are Rorschach tests for cognitively challenged voters.
"Authorized cover stories." Authorized by himself, his political bosses, and his spy cronies. The spy industry allows and requires lies and deception to protect national security and sources and official state secrets. They routinely employ honeypots (e.g., Eric Swalwell's girlfriend) to sleep their way to secret info. Spies are either selected for having slippery personality traits at the very start, or they lose track of the rules over time.
See the story of super-spy Robert Hanssen and his betrayals:
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0401997/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Hanssen
why? Is he a traitor? Why sell out on day one?
"It would have pardoned him TO SOME EXTENT". Quit with the weasel words. It would not have pardoned Snowden. Only the POTUS can pardon people. Sorry you don't like Gabbard. Or maybe you don't like Trump. But if she's voted down it wont be because she's a "Russian agent" or "Refused to say Snowden was a Traitor" its because the Democrats hate Trump and the Uniparty wants a uniparty stooge in the position.
I seem to recall, and I might be wrong, that after his interview with Gellman and Greenwald Snowden's flight from justice wasn't because he feared justice but because he feared - and justifiably so - extraordinary rendition by the US government. I believe the actual transfer of the information occurred in a foreign country (Hong Kong), putting Snowden at risk of being hauled off to some CIA black-site for debriefing, then to never be seen again.
I also recall Snowden's willingness to face the charges against him (after he'd fleed to Russia), but by then there was no way of a guarantee of safe passage or a fair trial.
Snowden discredited himself by running away but what he actually revealed should be known, and should want to be known, by every U.S citizen who cares about being spied on by his own fucking goverment without a warrant. Additionally, Snowden revealed the perjury of several U.S.intelligence officials going back a decade.
Tulsi is another apostate like RFK Jr.
"Biden and AOC were "sickened" to see a...racist bully(?)...border patrol officer twirl his reins to control a horse. Sickened they said!
These hearings are Rorschach tests for cognitively challenged voters. "
HEH. 100%
"Nominee For Top Criminal Justice Position Interviewed By Nation’s Top Criminals"
HEH
If he hadn't fled he'd have been buried alive in Supermax or possibly killed.
Obama was President when Snowden exposed the secret surveillance state operating like the Stazi so he wasn't going to get any help from the media or from the so-called liberals in the Democratic Party, those who used to be the reliable allies of a whistleblower like Snowden.
Thanks, gilbar. That crime is defined in the Constitution, with the very important word "only", because the framers were keen students of history, and knew well how much mischief lay in the abuse of that accusation. Same with Bills of Attainder. There is a reason why treason doth never prosper.
They seem to think if they call Snowden a traitor they don’t have to address the violations he exposed.
Bingo!
Tulsi should have told Bennet, "Settle down, Mike."
Perhaps a good response from her (maybe she gave it): "Senator, I had an employee of the last Administration simply label me a terrorist and put me on a watch list without even notifying me of the allegations, much less given an opportunity to defend myself in a court of law. I'm not interested in treating other Americans this way, even if that is what you want me to do right now."
It would have fit in nicely with her opening statement about not being a puppet. Then again, she could have retorted: "I'm not going be your puppet to call Snowden a traitor. If that is your judgement of him and you wish to say it, go ahead. I'll wait to use such words when he is found guilty in a court."
If drugging you is wrong, I don't wanna be right.
If drugging you is wrong, I don't wanna be right.
Your mama and daddy say it's a shame
It's a downright disgrace
But long as you got a streak in your hair
I don't care what your people say
Exactly. They want to keep their dirty laundry a secret…
Langford was a big proponent of that lousy border bill that the Dems are so fond of. He’s an ass.
It is clear that the Dems are going to vote against Gabbard and Kennedy. Probably Patel too. So, it comes down to Collins, Murkowski and McConnell. Now, those three are TRAITORS. I'm hoping that Trump will tell them to piss up a rope, and make recess appointments of all three.
In would have liked to have seen a defiant fuck-you type statement of the kind the liberals give when confronted by opposition Senators but that would upset the Democrat Senators and the Anti-Trump Senators that are part of the Republican Senate..
OT, but why does the NTSB feel it necessary to introduce a cast of characters!? Just get on with your investigation
I need to find a tactful way of getting my wife to do this.
…become a huge fan Josie and the Pussycats cartoon? Oh that Alexandra Cabot!!! 😍….did you know Alexandra Cabot was Sherry from The Mickey Mouse Club??? Small world…
Wow someone with integrity. What a shocker.
Surely the Deep State has dirt on a minimum of one in ten Republican senators, which means she’s doomed.
I don't have any problem with her declining to utter a legal opinion on the record.
I think Snowden is morally and ethically a traitor. But I'm not stupid enough to go on the record in a Congressional hearing with what is ultimately a legal opinion.
So Snowden revealed that our government was illegally us. If he is a traitor then who is in jail for illegally spying on us.
I think RideSpaceMountain made an excellent distinction (not the gray hair comment, the other one). Snowden is likely guilty of violating laws governing handling classified material. The same can be said a lot of other people, known and unknown. Why are the Democrats demanding Snowden be called a traitor and not all those other folks?
Let their eyeballs roll
They will knock her around
Let their eyeballs roll
Trying to make her a clown
Let them do it live and on-air
As I fantasize about Tulsi's hair
Let her answers be told
They will say what they want
She's sexy and bold
That's why she's not what they want
I love to see her live and on-air
I wish my wife could have Tulsi's hair
A decade later their security procedures were not very solid see that mass air national guardsmen
She introduced H.Res. 1162 that expressed the sense of the House that the federal government should drop all charges against Snowden. You
can read the text here. You clearly have not been paying attention. I like Tulsi very much, and I have supported Trump from the start. However, I don't understand why she could not have simply agreed that Snowden is a traitor regardless of whether or not he disclosed information that we needed to know. It wasn't his place to do that, and it caused enormous harm to intelligence individuals in the field as well as highly effectively technology...that is no longer effective.
As much as I like her, and have posted on this blog more than once that I wanted Trump to pick her for VP, I could well understand if the committee votes against her for this position. The Dems got her good in my opinion, and I think her support among Republicans on the committee was not improved by her hardheadedness on a couple of issues.
- Krumhorn
This is right up there with the Senator from Vermont (Welch?) trying to get Kash Patel to say that “Biden won” the 2020 election. It’s like having to invite the vampire into your home before he can come in, some kind of magical incantation. Maybe these dimbulb Senators should ask something substantive.
....you = ROCOCEAN II
He could have asked if releasing missile technology, losing control of a signals plane, losing an experimental helicopter, losing possession of a drone, operating an open server, collaborating with a foreign corporation, socializing with a "spy" with "benefits, storing classified documents in unsecured storage,
employing foreign nationsls, etc., poses a risk to national security. What criteria would you consider when assessing risk?
She should have just said, "I don't recall him being convicted of treason in a court of law, so Senator you may want to ask why no case was brought before a jury."
Tulsi was born in American Samoa to a Samoan father (can’t find info on what her mother is). Too bad these guys didn’t ask her for her opinion on birthright citizenship.
JSM
If Snowden is a traitor then so is Hillary Clinton. They broke the same laws and flouted the same regulations.
"I think Snowden is morally and ethically a traitor."
Nope. He is morally and ethically a true hero, who acted with sincere concern for the behavior of his country toward those in and outside our boundaries.
Yes, without question.
Cruella deGabbard
planetgeo: Your proposed reply is perfect. (Though, I think Gabbard should have had the spine to just say, "No, he was not a traitor.")
debold
debold 2
"Snowden discredited himself by running away...."
No, he didn't. He knew well he might be consigning himself to lifetime in a SuperMax prison. Why should an intelligent and concerned citizen who objected to our nation's illegal behavior simply offer himself up to oblivion and a life of misery for revealing the grave crimes of other? Snowden had a sharp sense of self-preservation.
Clyde (sorry about your chopper): I think the Dems want to get R cabinet officers on record saying "Biden won" because they think this will undercut any efforts by this Admin to investigate 2020 fraud. As if making one conclusion, looking at facts, then changing the conclusion makes either the first or second version a "lie."
Pretty thin gruel, but these guys are desparate.
The nominees are also very careful to say Biden was certified and sworn in. I don't think they really care about the Rube Goldberg perjury trap of saying he won; I think they are grownups and realize that the USG has to stand up for the validity of everything it did over the last four years. Can't have every military officer who didn't get a promotion say the board was completely invalid because it was ultimately convened by an illegitimate CinC, for example. Note how they are handling the non-vaxxer firings, as another. They're not saying the firings were illegitimate; they're just hiring the guys back.
JSM
It's not a moment for social media? Isn't he trying to get some buzz? Where does he think that happens? Just Newsapers and TV?
Anyway, why not pivot. Ask if she knows the meaning of the word traitor. Asker her what she understands the defintion to be. Ask her if Snowden meets that definition. Be creative with your questions rather than pound the table and ask the same thing over and over. It's tedious and boring.
I could understand Senators wanting to vote her down, if they were using some kind of intellectual process to understand the candidate's views. But this is a total monkey show. It's grandstanding and ad hominem attack with no attempt toward gaining insight. The Senators in some cases need adult supervision and a requirement to explain their vote.
He would have served the interests of American citizens if he had stayed and revealed what you all are assuming was information related to government malfeasance, but he didn't. He downloaded and stole secrets related to USA national security and jumped on the first flight to China, but the Chinese wouldn't take him, didn't need him when they had Hillarys server and the entire Biden crime family working for them, so he ran to Russia where Putin keeps him in sight.
Snowden is a despicable spy and traitor, and anti-American Democrat Party member which is why he is a hero to shitheads like Cook.
Snowden does not equal Assange.
What did Snowden expose? Unlike Julian Assange, Snowden has not been open about what he stole and has revealed nothing to Americans.
That was Assange, not Snowden
He should be in supermax, just before his execution as a spy and traitor.
Yeah, every filthy rat has an overriding sense of self-preservation, and no sense of duty, honor, integrity, honesty, patriotism, faith or responsibility to anyone else but they're own narcissistic desires.
Is Jack Texeira a traitor? Was Daniel Ellsberg a traitor? If one, why not the other?
Every time they bring up Snowden, the American people are reminded that our own government spies on us.
Just so you know the other side is just eating this s*** up and think it's the best example of political courage they ever saw. The " speaking truth to power" & blah blah blah blah blah blah blah. TBH they really don't give a damn how awful they look or how pissed-off we get. No, they care about their own internal polling which don't include us. Much sound and fury but signifying nothing. So grind your teeth, change the channel, or go for a walk.
I think Snowden violated the law regarding mishandling of classified data. I don't even see the risk of saying he is a criminal for doing so in terms of defamation. It seems clear he violated that law, and I think he even admitted to doing so. Lots of people have gone to jail for a long time for violating those laws. Few have been convicted of treason, which can carry the death penalty.
Yes, Thanks n.n. An early trial for treason under that clause was brought against Aaron Burr (former VP of the US) and heard before the Chief Justice of the US. Who dismissed the case.
She said she's focused on "how we can prevent something like this from happening again." I'm not interested in the traitor label, I'm interested in whether she thought Snowden did a good thing or a bad thing. If he did a good thing, then why would she want to prevent it from happening again? If it was a bad thing, why can't she say so?
Probably - Prole.
She does have a little bit of the Yvonne de Carlo look going for her.
The tea leaves I'm reading say that she is toast as a nominee. That's unfortunate because somebody needs to stand up to the security state.
Snowden is not a traitor.
Snowden is a patriot who broke the law to protect the constitution.
I can understand Cooks opinion on this, but there is a right way and wrong way to handle what Snowden did. And Snowden chose the wrong way. But he did expose something that needed exposed.
I'm heartened by not just Gabbard's, and many other of Trump's nominees, saying that we need to find a way to allow whistle blowers to come forward without fear of retribution. This is obviously something that Trump wants. Done in a bipartisan way (like that's going to happen) it could be a great benefit to the Republic.
Whistle blower laws already exist, but like most of government processes they have become weaponized.
So far as I know, Tulsi Gabbard is NOT a lawyer and doesn't pretend to be one. and is not being proposed for a legal position. I don't know about Sen. Bennet, who was asking over and over for Gabbard to express an opinion about whether a particular individual is a "traitor". That's a legal opinion, about someone who has NOT been charged or convicted of treason.
If Tulsi had better lawyer support from the Trump establishment, she could have handled this question better. BUT, the whole thing was a partisan attack on Trump and a (very well qualified) Trump nominee.
"She does have a little bit of the Yvonne de Carlo look going for her"
Yvonne is well before my time but I see the resemblance. The most publicly alluring secondary-sexual characteristic of a woman is her hair. Of course women know this, which is why so many of them doing weird stuff to it defies explanation. Like the infamous "bob cut"...wtf, I know everything is queer as hell right now but if hetero dudes were interested in dating boys they'd just join the Lincoln Project.
"He should be in supermax, just before his execution as a spy and traitor."
It's good to know who the enemies of America's freedoms are, and you have identified yourself as that. Our government was engaging in broad spying into our online and telephone activities and conversations--without our consent, illegally, and surreptitiously--and you reserve your anger for the man brave enough to reveal it.
Gabbard is at best, completely off the wall and neck deep in conspiracy theories. Her unauthorized freelancing foreign policy forays also show a complete lack of intelligence and huge gullibility.
Why did she think she should privately meet Assad in 2018? She had three years before stood with three Syrian girls with horrific burns over their bodies and asked them 'how do you know it was Bashar al-Assad or Russia that bombed you, and not ISIS?'. This despite ISIS not having jets to launch airstrikes. She consistently misrepresented Syrian rebels behavior and reiterated that Assad was not a threat to the US.
She backed Russia entering the Syrian war on the side of Assad. She similarly blamed the Biden administration and NATO for Russia's invasion of Ukraine because they had not 'simply acknowledged Russia's legitimate security concerns.'
One could go on.
She is simply not up to the task of Director of National Intelligence. She represents real risk to the US and its allies (whatever allies mean in the Trump administration).
Does she lose street cred by answering the question?
More important: why aren't there more Tulsi deepfakes?
To my knowledge, Snowden hasn't been charged or tried, and treason is the result of a trial, military or civilian. Only that can the label of traitor be properly attached. Until then he remains innocent until proven guilty.
LLR-democratical Rich: "Gabbard is at best, completely off the wall and neck deep in conspiracy theories."
LOL
The russia russia russia collusion lunatics / there is no way Covid could have started in a lab / the hoax Steele dossier is totes legit(!) / Elon is a nazi(!) / Trump said to drink bleach(!) / (add about 200 more hoaxes and conspiracies here) crew has checked in!
Thank goodness!
Abacus Boy LLR-democratical Rich: "(whatever allies mean in the Trump administration)."
Meeting one's financial obligations to the alliance seems like a good place to start.....which most of our NATO buffoon allies have failed to do for decades....with the hearty approval of the New Soviet Democratical Forever War With No Good Result crew cheering them on every step of the way.
LLR-democratical Rich, like Li'l Adam Schiffty-Schiff with Bondi and Patel, seem very very very worried that someone might actually call BS on what our "elites" (who have missed every single major global geo-military event over the last 40 years) have been doing.
Yes Richie boy, I'm sure your Milley-fied crew does think Tulsi is "unqualified". From their pro-ChiCom perspective, she most certainly is...and she just might right the ship over at the failed DNI digs.
As someone who held security clearances for most of my adult life, I can’t condone what Snowden did. However, he revealed how the US government works with foreign governments to violate citizens’ rights. As for leaking, members of Congress and the IC leak all the time for political advantage. Snowden’s leaks exposed the corruption of the IC, and that will never be forgiven.
pacwest: "I can understand Cooks opinion on this, but there is a right way and wrong way to handle what Snowden did."
Snowden was correct in showing how the weaponized federal intel state was spying on and abusing American citizens. Unfortunately, he dumped alot more than that out there and it hurt the most important message of all which, ironically, was the message Snowden was most concerned about.
It's the other stuff that allows his critics to say Snowden just wanted to betray his nation and give our enemies everything they wanted to know.
Sounds like she’ll fit in very well with Trump’s team!
Drago has memorized the chanting points.
Have another drink. Bottoms up sport 🥃
"Snowden was correct in showing how the weaponized federal intel state was spying on and abusing American citizens. Unfortunately, he dumped alot more than that out there and it hurt the most important message of all which, ironically, was the message Snowden was most concerned about.
"It's the other stuff that allows his critics to say Snowden just wanted to betray his nation and give our enemies everything they wanted to know."
What was this "other stuff" you refer to and how did it hurt the US? Also, it's not that Snowden just dumped his materials onto the internet for anyone to find. He contacted Glenn Greenwald, who engaged another journalist, Laura Poitras. and they met with Snowden in a hotel in Hong Kong. He provided his documents to them. Greenwald and Poitras were in charge of any reporting or release of the documents to other journalistic entities. Snowden did not keep a cache of the files in his possession and there is no indication he has provided any US secrets he collected to any other persons or governments.
Tulsi's resolution on Snowden was a "sense of the House" - it was simply a statemet. And ends as follows:
"Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that—
(1) the National Security Agency’s bulk collection telephone records program was illegal and unconstitutional;
(2) Edward Snowden’s disclosure of this program to journalists was in the public interest; and
(3) the Federal Government should drop all charges against Edward Snowden."
Introducing the word "pardon" is just posioning the well. To some extent.
If he doesn't have the courage of his convictions then his stance is merely convenient.
Let's compare what Snowden did to what General Milley did. Which one is treasonous or more treasonous?
Its commonly known that the Democrat Senators, and Republicans like collins are up to their neck in conspiracy theories. They've been puppets of Zelensky, why else their support of Ukraine and hatred of Putin? And puppets of Israel, why else their constant support for Genocide and hatred of Iran.
I think we need to investigate why they're in Bibi's and Zelensky's pocket.
Back away from that special herb tea, Howard. She will be confirmed.
Snowden was correct in showing how the weaponized federal intel state was spying on and abusing American citizens. Unfortunately, he dumped alot more than that out there and it hurt the most important message of all which, ironically, was the message Snowden was most concerned about.
I am going to agree with Drago on this one. Snowden was probably well intentioned, but he screwed it up. He is not a traitor.
Jack Teixiera gave away secrets to his videogame buddies. He's in prison for that. Was he a traitor? Not in the traditional sense of the word. Like Daniel Ellsberg, he was charged with violations of the Espionage Act, not treason (The charges were dropped in Ellsberg's case because of government misconduct).
Isn't it similar for Snowden? His taking refuge in Russia complicates things, but if he went to Ecuador, Brunei or the Maldives (all countries with no extradition treaty with the US), he'd probably have already been picked up by now and taken to the US or a black site. Unfortunately, Rebecca West, author of The Meaning of Treason and The New Meaning of Treason isn't available to give us the latest update on what treason means in the age of the internet.
Her parents were both US citizens, so she was a natural born citizen.
Kak bringing and spreading his line of KAK.
Now do John Kerry.
The stupidest thing said in regard to Snowden is that he should have just given the information to a congressman or a senator or a reporter.
The whole point is that Snowdon believed that there was a good chance he would be murdered for releasing the information. Can you say he's wrong? Does the name "Jeffry Epstein" ring a bell? Or Seth Rich? How about the whistleblower who managed to commit "suicide" with a nail gun in the back of the head? Or the guy who told his friends he wouldn't commit suicide right before he was scheduled to testify against Boeing? Or John MacAfee?
If Snowdon was a traditional "traitor" he would have just given the info to the other country and gone back to get more or take the payoff from that country like Alger Hiss and Jonathan Pollard and Robert Hansen did. That he didn't do this suggests that he wasn't an ordinary traitor.
Does that excuse him from the crime of abusing his security clearance? No, because he's obviously guilty of doing that. If someone decided he deserved a pardon after being convicted of that crime (of which Hilary Clinton, Anthony Weiner, Huma Abedin, and others were surely guilty as well), then he could be pardoned. BUT being guilty of abusing a security clearance is not a capital crime, and since none of us can with a straight face say "Well, there's absolutely no way the 'intelligence' community would have murdered Snowdon; that's just his paranoid fantasy," there's no justification for calling him a "traitor."
Post a Comment