Rand Paul Suggests Snowden And Clapper Share A Prison Cell http://t.co/kPDCzcRC3T
— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) January 5, 2014
@KagroX @joshtpm @PaulHRosenberg I can see the argument for some kind of punishment for Snowden, but that's Cruel & Unusual.
— billmon (@billmon1) January 5, 2014
From Politico, c2:35pm Thursday:
Rep. Peter King went on an anti-New York Times tirade on Thursday afternoon, deriding the paper of record as a “disgrace” and calling on Americans to “reject” it for its editorial calling for clemency for Edward Snowden.
“Their editorial today and their whole pattern over the last several years, they’ve really made themselves a blame-America-first rag as far as I’m concerned, and why we exalt The New York Times is beyond me,” the New York Republican said on Fox News. “They go out of their way to be apologists for terrorists and go after those in law enforcement and military who are trying to win this war.”
King, who has long been a defender and proponent of the National Security Agency, called the editors “a disgrace” and said he wishes they “cared more about America than they did about the rights of terrorists’ appeasers.” King said NSA programs do not violate the privacy of Americans and that lives are saved because of them…
Not quite an hour later:
Update 3:25p.m.: As several of our Twitter followers have pointed out, King calling the Times “apologists for terrorists” is a little ironic, considering he was once “one of the nation’s most outspoken supporters of the Irish Republican Army and a prolific fundraiser for the Irish Northern Aid Committee (NorAid), allegedly the IRA’s American fundraising arm” as noted by this 2011 Mother Jones piece….
The NYTimes has since doubled down on its call for some form of clemency.
Greenwald’s fiercest competitor critic, Paul Carr, agrees “… Snowden might be an unlikeable sort, but justice rarely concerns itself with likable sorts. Phil Spector was offered a plea deal, OJ was offered a plea deal, as were Jack Abramoff, Scooter Libby, Bernie Madoff, Paris Hilton and Bruno Mars. Fortunately we — by which I mean Americans, and Brits like me — are fortunate to live in a country where being an ass, a hypocrite, or even a scoundrel, doesn’t deny one access to justice….For all of his arrogance and his muddled, me-me-millennial politics, there’s no denying that Snowden’s outrage at government spying (in the US at least) is authentic, or that, like Chelsea Manning before him, he at least made some effort to get his superiors to listen to him before he went public. Simply put, Snowden is proof that you can be both a whistle-blower and a blowhard: a whistle-blowhard.”
Personally, I like this guy’s suggestion:
… Bring him home. Sentence him to time served in Putin’s Russia. Make it as quiet and uncomplicated as possible. And let the debate — and real reform — go on without him. He deserves to live in this country in as much peace as Orlando Bosch did, and with as many career opportunities as have been afforded Elliott Abrams and Ollie North, who did not release information for free but, rather, some missiles to terror states for money.
Ben Franklin
Clapper is not a bad person, he doesn’t think, not bad as a person, just bad on principle.
WTF? Impugning Snowden with the same yellow snow as Clapper?
A bad person has no integrity. Clapper? Stop trying to transcend the Teabag underlings, Rand. FU and the whole conservative misdirection from conservative to libertarian bullshit.
Patricia Kayden
“And let the debate — and real reform — go on without him.”
Amen. Real reform is the only thing that matters. No one should be interested in the shenanigans of Snowden or Greenwald.
Litlebritdiftrnt
King can kiss my lily-white English arse. He actively fund raised to enable the killing of my colleagues, I lost friends because of his fund raising and supporting of the IRA. The absolute chutzpah of him calling anyone “terrorist supporting” is beyond belief. Fuck him and the horse he rode in on.
Poopyman
Snowden took laptops and thumb drives full of classified data to China, then to Russia. There’s no way he could realistically assume they’d remain unread, and I can’t believe they haven’t been.
Fuck him. He should be rotting in jail.
Ben Franklin
@Poopyman:
And fuck your lack of redemptive self-awareness. What have you done for liberty, aside from commenting on a blog anonymously?
Bill E Pilgrim
Prison would be bad just to begin with, but being made to to share a cell with Clapper would really bug anyone.
Aji
@Bill E Pilgrim: I see what you did there.
Baud
So the bottom line here is that Rand Paul wants to see Snowden in prison.
Gin & Tonic
Can’t help wondering who’s old enough to remember Philip Agee?
Poopyman
@Aji: OMG! Peter King is posting here as BF! Pretty soon Tom Friedman’s going to out himself here too, I can feel it.
Or maybe that’s the chili ….
cathyx
Bring on the democrats against an open and transparent government. Unless the president is a republican. Then Snowden would be a hero.
The Sheriff's A Ni-
@Baud: STAND WITH RAND
Baud
@Ben Franklin:
I would do anything for liberty, but I won’t do that.
Glocksman
The replies in that TPM thread attacking Wyden for asking Clapper the question in the first place leave out one little thing.
From the TPM thread:
What Clapper could have said was ‘Senator, I cannot legally answer that question in an open hearing. Ask me in a closed hearing and I’ll answer the question’.
Instead he chose to lie.
Poopyman
@Baud: Frankly, I think Rand Paul only cares if he sees Rand Paul on TV.
Violet
@Poopyman: Rand Paul wants to see Rand Paul in the White House.
Belafon
Here’s my deal for Snowden: I’ll drop the stealing secrets charge, but he has to face the taking secrets to other countries.
Aji
@Poopyman: I think it must be the chili. I have yet to see anything – in this thread, at least – pompous enough for the ‘Stache or outerboroughrageboy enough for King.
Baud
Uh, I think they could work out a plea deal. That’s different from clemency or a full pardon.
different-church-lady
You wanna know what would be really cruel? Forcing either one of them listen to Rand Paul for more than 90 seconds.
Under that arrangement, wouldn’t we owe him a couple of years?
Ben Franklin
@Poopyman:
Uh, that would make you a hybrid of Rogers/Feinstein.
What a twosome that would make. (brain bleach plz)
Baud
@different-church-lady:
In Putin’s Russia, time serves you.
Ben Franklin
@Baud:
How’s your personal comfort zone so far?
different-church-lady
@Baud:
Either way, before you could do that you’d have to convince Fast Eddie he wasn’t going to get drone assassinated the moment he stepped back on US soil — easier said than done.
Methinks he’s not actually interested in returning under any arrangement.
Baud
@Ben Franklin:
Wonderful since, like Cole, I’m not wearing any pants. Why do you ask?
different-church-lady
@Baud: Damn, I just feel sooooo proud about teeing that up for you!
Baud
@different-church-lady:
That’s my take also.
Ben Franklin
@Baud:
Just want to send you some complimentary lotion; you know, for comforts sake.
Baud
@Ben Franklin:
I see.
Bill E Pilgrim
@Ben Franklin:
Oh I love them. Didn’t they write “I Left My Heart in San Francisco”?
Rodney King and I?
Ben Franklin
@Baud:
Until you go blind.
Heliopause
Well, that’s quite an equivalence.
different-church-lady
@Bill E Pilgrim: That was Oscar Feinstein II, her father.
MikeJ
As soon as Snowden turns himself in, we can start negotiating deals. As it is, he’s a fugitive from justice. There’s no reason to consider a deal until he’s in a cell and is willing to do something in return for a deal. Perhaps he can sing about anything illegal Glen(n) has done.
Baud
@Ben Franklin:
Ok, then.
cathyx
@MikeJ: I’m with you. Anyone who makes Obama look bad deserves life in prison.
Ben Franklin
@Baud:
yup
J R in WV
I can’t blame him for being interested in a destination better than his current location. Time served seems unlikely to interest him, though. He did seem interested in Brazil at one time, but they seem a little to anarchic to me.
I don’t have much to say in favor of anyone who supported the IRA, although the British crown did steal Ireland from the Irish, and then give parts of it to Scots being deported from Scotland, where they were unruly and rebellious subjects of Her Majesty.
Ben Franklin
@cathyx:
Anyone who makes Obama look bad deserves life in prison
Truly that is the cardinal sin @ BJ..
Hill Dweller
@cathyx: Do you honestly believe someone who stole thousands of classified documents, regardless of motivation, and fled to Russia via China is going to avoid punishment?
No country on the planet is going to set that precedent.
The Sheriff's A Ni-
Somewhere, Thoreau and Dr. King Jr. are looking at Snowden and the Firebaggers and wondering where the fuck did we go wrong.
MikeJ
@Baud:
For one thing, you don’t get clemency or a pardon until after you’ve been convicted. Again, he needs to show up and go to trial.
Ben Franklin
@Hill Dweller:
Certainly not the Leader of the Free World, at least.
MikeJ
@The Sheriff’s A Ni-:
Remember when Rosa Parks fled to Russia to avoid prosecution for refusing to move?
Baud
@MikeJ:
You can get a pre-conviction pardon. It’s not the norm, but it has happened.
cathyx
@The Sheriff’s A Ni-: Dr king would be all for government surveillance on all americans. Heck, he was surveilled, and nothing happened to him.
Cassidy
Ahahahahahahahahahahahaha….oh wow, hhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha…coming from that fucking idiot, ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha…what a fucking ignorant douche, ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha…./wipes tears, that was awesome. Please, don’t stop being a narcissistic, self-indulgent, whiny emoprog. If it weren’t for the stalwarts of suburban liberty like you, we would have to find our comedy elsewhere.
@Litlebritdiftrnt: Prettymuch. That shitstain should be rotting in prison.
ruemara
@Ben Franklin: The way you two go godwin on anyone who fails to acknowledge the pure sainthood of Edward Snowden pretty much makes your Obot shrieks a massive joke. You’re not good sales people for your stances.
Ben Franklin
We’ve already established the baseline of your humorbone, on a previous thread.
It’s not up to Mister Rogers level, but transcends Ronald McDonald.
MikeJ
My favorite piece of American writing is King’s “Letter from a Moscow Hilton. “
Ben Franklin
@ruemara:
go suck on a Hammerhead.
Cassidy
@Ben Franklin: Oh please, tell me more of your suburban outrage manifesto. You coddled bitches whine more than teabaggers, but then you’re really not that different from them.
Anne Laurie
@The Sheriff’s A Ni-: Can’t speak for Dr. King, but IIRC, Thoreau’s contemporaries regarded him as a pissy-arsed drama queen making a big show in order to embarrass the friends who’d kept him from starving to death in a snowbank… or rotting in a jail cell for refusing to deal with the real world and pay his ridiculous little poll tax. That whole “Why are you in there, Thoreau? — Why are YOU out there, Emerson?”… the eyerolling was epic, among all the Finest Minds. David Henry, playing the martyr to advertise his so-called ‘pacifism’! What a blowhard, posing for the lithographers and handing out newspaper-friendly sound bites!
gene108
Abrams and North broke the law to give the Ruskie Evil Empire a black eye, by opposing the spread of Global Communism into Central America. They are real heroes. They should be given Presidential Medals of Freedom for hastening the end of the Cold War, because the Commies knew they could not spread anymore into this Hemisphere. Also, breaking a law sponsored by Ted “hic-I need a drink, I killed a woman” Kennedy is the patriotic duty of true patriots whose patriotism means they love America. /wing-nut
srv
@Anne Laurie: Balloon-Juice truly has become the last refuge for hippy statists.
burnspbesq
@Ben Franklin:
Damn. I hoped we were rid of you for good.
Ben Franklin
@burnspbesq:
right back atcha.
burnspbesq
I could almost live with a full pardon for Snowden if it meant that Greenie would serve the maximum sentence for aiding and abetting Snowden’s violations of 18 U.S.C. 893.
eemom
Don’t watch Downton Abbey, working my ass off, need some distraction, and don’t give a shit about Snowden. Yay for this thread!
Ben Franklin
@burnspbesq:
Here’s a shocker. I don’t know of anyone who cares what you think about Snowden. Mebbe you can cobble some support from conservatives here.
Corner Stone
@The Sheriff’s A Ni-: You really want to throw Thoreau in there, my friend?
Because I do not think you do.
Corner Stone
The absolute certainty that so many people here have, contradicted by the actual USG, that Snowden somehow gave or bargained or sold info to foreign countries…and yet you keep repeating it.
I guess Mike Rogers, Peter King, and other rwnj elected officials are now your North Star.
Cassidy
@Ben Franklin: As opposed to listening to you? I think any one of us would choose listening to Burnsie drone on about how much he hates music anyone has heard of than your coddled, entitled bitching that someone didn’t buy you a fucking pony.
Aren’t you supposed to be doing something in the name of liberty right now, anyway, other than commenting anonymously on a blog? Please don’t let us stop you. Take as long as you need. If it takes you, say, forever, and we never hear from you again, we will carry on through that tragedy.
Ben Franklin
@Cassidy:
You need to limber up on the lexicon. You are a stale apologist of no merit. Why would you want me to go do the good work whilst you engage in mutual masturbation without accountability? I feel responsible for tutoring you into adulthood, and that. I realize is a thankless task. However, for the sake of you and your paramours, i must remain in place.
Even though it’s more productive to pick out the red M&M’s than to offer missives contrary, I feel duty-bound.
Corner Stone
Hmmm…BJ commenter or Rep Peter King?
It’s getting harder to tell.
Cassidy
@Ben Franklin: I have no idea what you just said. At this point in the game, all your comments talk about your preference for Thai drag queens. You have nothing to say that is remotely worth considering. If I wanted to listen to some whiny, entitled babbling, I could turn on any random teabagger. Predictably, you don’t sound all that different.
Ben Franklin
@Cassidy:
And that, my toddler, is the gist of your ideology.
Cassidy
@eemom: Your husband might be a little miffed that you need a distraction and turned to the internet,
Belafon
@Corner Stone: Rep Pete “IRA” King?
Also, I can’t seem to find the correct google search where the government says no secrets were released by Snowden. All I find is that Snowden says he released no secrets.
mainmata
@Litlebritdiftrnt: My paternal grandfather was involved in the Easter Rebellion and subsequently fled eventually to the US whence I now exist. I agree with you that Peter King’s support of the IRA did not help the search for peace in Northern Ireland. But I lived in Britain during part of this period (Thatcher era) and there’s not much doubt that Britain was not searching for a compromise but was continuing its longstanding colonial policy of supporting the Protestants against the Catholics (but using the terrorism schtick as the excuse, as usual). The IRA’s tactics didn’t help diplomatically but they had little choice. So GB’s policy was ultimately totally self-defeating since they were never a neutral party. as we have seen in the Middle East, in a different context that doesn’t work.
eemom
@Cassidy:
Oh, he’s working too, bless his heart. We two lawyer households are funner than a barrel of monkeys.
ruemara
@Ben Franklin: Your wit and brilliance is proven once again.
chopper
@Ben Franklin:
toddler, gist, etc etc.
Culture of Truth
I used to dislike Ed Snowden, but now I really hate him for making me take his side against Peter King. Ha ha
Hal
I may have missed this answer in the comments, but foes Snowden have to be convicted or cop a plea in order to be granted clemency?
Also, I would support clemency for Snowden if we can guarantee Peter King’s head would explode.
Tissue Thin Pseudonym (JMN)
@mainmata:
Yeah, the British really backed them into a corner requiring that they blow up a bunch of band members.
Villago Delenda Est
The information Snowden carried with him could certainly have been accessed by the Chinese or the Russians. Is it a certainty? No, we can’t say that. However, we can not dismiss the possibility that it may have been…the circumstances lend us to err on the side of caution (that is, do the CONSERVATIVE thing in the traditional sense, not the contemporary political sense) in assessing how we deal with Snowden.
A huge part of the problem being faced by the authorities is the NSA can’t figure out what information he may have walked off with, aside from that already disclosed. That alone may make it prudent to forgive his sins…just to know what has been off the reservation and in China and Russia.
This is all quite apart from the necessity of a public conversation about the NSA’s capabilities, means, and the checks that need to be placed on it.
The Sheriff's A Ni-
@cathyx: And what would he say about fleeing to Hong Kong and Moscow with state secrets in tow?
Thoreau and King knew about doing the crime, doing the time. Here, we get ‘If a Firebagger man-crush does it, its not a crime’. Cry about Clapper and Obots while having an Ollie North-sized mote in your own eye.
Yatsuno
Popcorn anyone?
Carolinus
@Corner Stone:
Let’s just gloss over the vast majority of Greenwald-land’s disclosures which have dealt with purely foreign intelligence operations of the U.S. and their allies, where publishing their details effectively shares them with their adversaries. When Snowden was first lobbying for asylum in China, before he got spooked, spent three days in the Russian HK consulate, and then fled on to Russia, he disclosed to the South China Morning Post the details of US cyber espionage operations targetting China, in order to improve his chances, or in Greenwald’s own words, “to ingratiate himself to the people of Hong Kong and China.” He’s also offered to both Brazil and Germany, to share his insider’s knowledge, to help those countries investigate US Intelligence — both countries declined to offer him asylum in exchange for what essentially would have been defecting.
I just can’t wrap my ahead around folks who like some of what he’s disclosed, and the “debate” it’s caused, but then see that as a reason to excuse all the rest of his mass criminal acts. Why not advocate for him not being charged with any leaks that could, even in the loosest sense, be considered whistle-blowing, allowing him to charged and prosecuted for all the rest?
Why Snowden Won’t (and Shouldn’t) Get Clemency
He went too far to be considered just a whistleblower
If what he did isn’t espionage, then nothing anymore is. Getting his Booz Allen job with the intent to steal hundreds of thousands of classified documents, social engineering his coworkers to access those files, fleeing with them to China, and then proceeding bulk leak them (let’s be honest, he had neither the time to vet even the 58,000 British state secret documents he dumped, nor the expertise to even know what was actually sensitive).
gian
@Ben Franklin:
If he had the guts like Mandela, or King, to go to jail, instead of running to hostile foreign countries is one point.
If he had the guts to just go to some place like Switzerland (which is happy to hide out filmmakers who drug and sodomize teenage girls in the US) and let some sort of legal process happen is another.
If you weren’t paying attention under Bush, what with the stories of what essentially sounded like a mirroring room in the AT&T office in San Francisco for the Feds, you might’ve been shocked at Edward’s released information…
I don’t feel much different towards him than I would to some guy who ran to the USSR and told them cold war era secrets about the actions the US was taking in Cambodia in about 1975.
the story that is swallowed by the snowden cult of personality is that some new hire contractor was able to do this, and as far as has been mainstream news, the contractor still has the contracts.
Ash Can
If people are going to believe that the USG itself claims that Snowden didn’t make any of his stolen information available to the governments of China and Russia, why not also take the gov at its word when it claims that this is bullshit and that Snowden never said a word to his superiors about his concerns?
I’m sorry, but when someone takes a job for the stated purpose of stealing classified information, collaborates with a gadfly activist before he even takes the job, then after stealing said information heads straight to the two nations on the earth that are the fucking gold standard for precisely the kind of domestic spying he claims to be against, then yeah, there sure as hell is some denying his “outrage” is authentic.
gian
@gian:
sorry, hadn’t read enough to get it through my thick skull. I responded to the troll
Omnes Omnibus
AL, unrelated to the theme of the thread, but for those of us who are Hiberian-impaired, could you define a mucker?
Omnes Omnibus
@gian: Not a troll, a douchecanoe. There is a difference.
Michael
This is the douche-iest bout of cognitive dissonance I’ve ever seen:
The funny thing is imagining the sort of mind that thinks this schtick sounds intelligent, rather than simply terribly put on.
BillinGlendaleCA
@Yatsuno: They allow a popcorn popper in the hospital?
Keith G
@Poopyman:
You sir are sounding like a lazy, clueless idiot. I do hope you are not.
If you would bother to follow the reporting of Barton Gellman you would know that the info did not travel with Snowden. You are not alone as this is a major mis-apprehension here at the Juice of the Balloon.
Snowden took expansive measures to be sure “bad guys” did not get the unedited info. , and they have not: Not China, not Russia, not anyone except those now well known few journalists.
With the clear exception of President Obama, I don’t think that there is another American who has done more for his fellow citizens in the last few years that has Snowden. We are lucky he chose to take on these breath taking risks.
Keith G
@Omnes Omnibus: Someone who mucks?
As I kid, I had to muck out my horse’s stall.
Mandalay
@Poopyman:
Snowden has stated that by the time he went public he had already handed over everything to journalists he met in Hong Kong, and that no classified NSA data was accessible by him after that. The journalists took everything, and nothing remained with Snowden.
Yet you still can’t believe that the Russians and Chinese haven’t read the data! When a plausible alternative scenario exists you just ignore it so you can maintain you belief system.
ETA: I see Keith G has already made the same point in post #88.
Keith G
@Corner Stone: I do love how some have gained the magical ability to read the minds of the dead.
Omnes Omnibus
@Keith G: Well sure, but I doubt that is meaning AL intended. My understanding of Irish idiom comes from The Pogues, An Irish RM, some Behan plays, the shit that comes through Jack Higgins novels, I did, however, meet Gerry Adams during his mid-90s US speaking tour. I think I was the only non-Catholic in the house.
Keith G
@Omnes Omnibus:
Feces? And all this time I thought I was shoveling shit.
Quote from Wikipedia
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay:
He said he can’t believe that the Russians and Chinese have not read the data. What is your confusion?
@Keith G: I guess I still don’t see how the term applies to King. I assume AL used it for a particular reason.
Mandalay
@Glocksman:
And now the lie is being compounded. Despite being given the question the previous day, Clapper’s lawyer is now claiming that Clapper never saw it….
Snowden gets lambasted as a traitor, but shitfilth like Clapper and his lawyer are the real traitors.
Carolinus
@Mandalay:
Yes, that’s what Snowden now claims. That the classified files only went as far as China. At various times Greenwald has claimed otherwise, for example:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jul/13/reuters-article-dead-man-s-switch
Snowden has also recently pushed back on Greenwald’s claims that he’d sent encrypted versions of his stolen document trove to a number of other people around the world (awaiting a decryption password that will be distributed if anything happens to Snowden):
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/edward-snowden-after-months-of-nsa-revelations-says-his-missions-accomplished/2013/12/23/49fc36de-6c1c-11e3-a523-fe73f0ff6b8d_story.html
Which of the two of them is telling the truth? Who knows.
Keith G
@Carolinus:
A comprehensive view of what happened by one of the nation’s best national security reporters.
Anne Laurie
@Omnes Omnibus: Self quote: “… in the NORAID-enabling Irish-American enclave of my birth, a mucker was defined as someone everyone called “friend” because you certainly didn’t want him as your enemy… and he was known to divide all the world into those two categories….
If Putin were Irish, he’d have been a mucker, but I’m sure the Russians have their own very evocative word!
Omnes Omnibus
@Anne Laurie: Thanks. That makes sense.
Mandalay
@Omnes Omnibus:
Any confusion lies with you, not me. Anyone is free to claim that in their opinion Snowden is lying, and that he (either accidentally or deliberately) allowed the Russians and Chinese to read the classified NSA data.
However, Snowden has stated that he destroyed all access to the data on his own equipment after he had handed everything over to journalists in Hong Kong, and before he went public. The simplest and most plausible explanation (for me) is that Snowden was telling the truth. So anyone who asserts that the Russians and Chinese got data from Snowden as a statement of fact, and can’t believe any other possibility, is just full of shit.
But since you can’t understand my previous post I doubt that you will understand this one either. Maybe Keith’s post #88 will make more sense to you. He is essentially making the same point.
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay: You said:
Poopyman said:
Please explain how these statements contradict one another.
Larv
@Mandalay:
Ah, I see. When Snowden says something self-serving (he didn’t take any documents to China/Russia), we should take him at his word because he’s a hero. But when Clapper does the same, he’s obviously lying. Nope, no double standard there.
Mandalay
@Carolinus:
Thanks for that info. You raise an excellent point. Greenwald is usually very precise in his choice of words, and the statements you cite certainly give the impression that Snowden still has some data in his personal possession.
I would trust Snowden more than Greenwald to be telling the truth.
Regardless, my larger point was that insisting that Snowden has given data to the Russians and Chinese as a matter of fact, is nonsense.
Larv
@Mandalay:
Why? I’m serious, I don’t see why this is remotely simple or plausible. He was embarking on what had to be a fairly terrifying odyssey, and the documents he had were his only bargaining chip. Why is it plausible that he would have given them all to journalists and left himself with essentially nothing of value in a strange land and with an uncertain future? It’s certainly not crazy to be dubious of this.
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay:
Greenwald is a polemicist. His precision is designed for effect, not accuracy.
Edited slightly.
pseudonymous in nc
@mainmata:
The IRA was the ideological front for a bunch of gangsters who happened to be able to tap into the hearts and wallets of plastic paddies with rebel fantasies like Peter King. Every dollar that went into the hat for “the Cause” ensured that for decades, the best and brightest in Northern Ireland from both communities got the fuck out as soon as they could.
Mandalay
@Omnes Omnibus:
Dude, you are carefully plucking two sentences out of two posts, and demanding that I explain how they contradict each other. That’s mindless. The fact that the first word of my sentence is “yet” is a dead giveaway that what preceded it is highly relevant.
My two posts essentially repeat what Keith had already said in post 88. Sorry, but if you truly can’t understand his argument or mine then I really can’t help you any further.
Carolinus
@Keith G:
Yes, I’ve listened to that Bart Gellman interview and others, read all his Snowden articles and followed his statements on Twitter. Gellman has a detailed knowledge of Snowden’s history, and so has no excuse (besides chasing future access) for turning his 14 hour interview into a 2-page hagiography.
For example, allowing this goofy claim to stand, with no follow-up, was just embarrassing:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/edward-snowden-after-months-of-nsa-revelations-says-his-missions-accomplished/2013/12/23/49fc36de-6c1c-11e3-a523-fe73f0ff6b8d_story.html
Snowden:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/report-snowden-stayed-at-russian-consulate-while-in-hong-kong/2013/08/26/8237cf9a-0e39-11e3-a2b3-5e107edf9897_story.html
http://www.buzzfeed.com/maxseddon/putin-snowden-asked-russia-to-fight-with-him-but-we-said-no
Odd, isn’t it, that Gellman didn’t follow-on with, “So you claim no relationship and no agreements with the Russian government? What exactly were you negotiating then when you spent three days in the Hong Kong Russian consulate, just prior to flying to Russia? Why is one of the overseers of the FSB acting as your Russian lawyer and spokesman? If there’s no arrangement, why do Russian security forces guard you 24-hours a day, prohibiting you from seeing visitors unless they go through lengthy negotiations?”
Instead Gellman plays along and paints a picture of Snowden as a free actor. Again from the interview article, Gellman editorializing:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-57610522/snowden-seeks-the-worlds-help-against-u.s-charges
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/the-political-debate-over-offering-snowden-asylum-in-germany-a-931497-2.html
Omnes Omnibus
Both fucking statements said that others had read what Snowden had. I have no idea of whether those statements are factually accurate. I just read what you both wrote.
KeithG said something different than you did. You don’t get to rely on his analysis.
Mandalay
@Omnes Omnibus: Right, but in those quotes that Carolinus cited Greenwald is putting Snowden in a bad light. I have no idea why Greenwald might do that on purpose, but I find it even harder to believe that he would have done it inadvertently in his writing.
The only plausible explanation I can come up is that Greenwald was bullshitting. At least that seems more plausible to me than the notion that Snowden was lying, and retained classified data on his computers.
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay: So? Does this support Snowden or Greenwald or what?
Oh noes!
Mandalay
@Omnes Omnibus:
In post 88 Keith made the points that the data didn’t travel to Russia with Snowden, the Chinese didn’t get the data either, and Snowden didn’t retain the data (according to Snowden). I made the same points in post 90 (and again in post 100 just for your benefit). We were both refuting comments in post 4 that insisted that the Chinese and Russians must have read Snowden’s data.
If you think Keith’s analysis was substantially different from mine let’s hear it.
Carolinus
@Mandalay:
Why would it be any worse that he retained the classified data while in China vs keeping it on to Russia? I get that the explanation he gave Gellman was that he’s some sort of Chinese counter-espionage expert and so that one didn’t count, but he passed the files on to Greenwald and Poitras, and they certainly aren’t. Why even recklessly set your meet in China in the first place, particularly if you’re some expert that understands the breadth and depth of their cyber and electronic surveillance/hacking?
Omnes Omnibus
You said this. Dig the double negative. Grammar matters.
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay: @Omnes Omnibus: My bad, I messed up the reply function.
Mandalay
@Larv:
No, it is certainly not crazy to be dubious of anything that Snowden claims. But it is crazy to blindly assume that everything he says must be false, and that he must have provided NSA data to the Russians and Chinese as a matter of fact, which is what some folks here regularly assert without evidence.
And it is certainly not true that the documents were his only bargaining chip. Even without the data, the very presence of Snowden in Hong Kong and Moscow seeking help gave Russia and China some massive free PR, and I’m sure that they were both delighted to show the world that they would not bow to US demands for his return.
I don’t think Snowden anticipated being refused asylum in China, but I believe his claim that his only goal was to expose illegal and illegitimate conduct by the US government, and it also makes sense to me that he removed all the data from his computers. Given the massive strain he must have been under, doing that would give him one less thing to worry about. At least that’s how I see it. YMMV.
Keith G
@Carolinus: I still do not see any indication that Snowden traveled with the vast collection of top secret data (surely more than a thumb drive), nor do I see on the record that Snowden used the promise of access to said data as a chip to negotiate with foreign regimes. That is all I care about.
If Snowden handed over raw data to other governments that would pit him in an untenable position.
Other than that, he can meet and treat with whomever he wants. I don’t care how pretty the process is or if some domestic sensibilities are assaulted. I only care about a very specific bottom line.
Omnes Omnibus
@Keith G:
Well, that’s a thing, isn’t it? Right now, neither of us know.
Mandalay
@Omnes Omnibus:
Ha! I was deliberately responding in kind to the claim in post 4: “There’s no way he could realistically assume they’d remain unread, and I can’t believe they haven’t been.”. Since double negatives offend your sensibilities so much, please go after the poster who started it all rather than me.
But thank God you are always here to do your important work.
Carolinus
In total in agreement on that count. No matter what has been claimed about him wanting to ultimately end up Iceland or some other democracy, the fact that he chose Hong Kong as the place he took his initial stand, where he went public, and where he first lobbied for asylum, speaks volumes.
The concept of living in Asian countries had long appealed to him. Here he is listing his preferences:
http://www.buzzfeed.com/ellievhall/edward-snowdens-online-past-revealed
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay: Can you honestly say that your comments follows straight from post 4 with no subsequent post that may intervene?
Mandalay
@Omnes Omnibus:
Yes I can. My first post here was post 90 responding to post 4. I cited the quote “There’s no way he could realistically assume they’d remain unread, and I can’t believe they haven’t been.”, and I responded “Yet you still can’t believe that the Russians and Chinese haven’t read the data!”.
I promise I won’t not never use no double negatives never again, even when imitating other posters, OK? Now please Mr Grammar policeman, can you just let me off with a warning this time? Aren’t there other threads here awaiting your inspection?…
Omnes Omnibus
@Mandalay: You are either dumb as fuck or you are an asshole. Either way, I shan’t take you seriously ever again.
AxelFoley
Man, FUCK any kind of clemency for Snowden. This dude gave away secret info to China AND Russia, and some fuckers in this country think we should just give him a slap on the wrist?
I don’t give a damn what side of the political spectrum you fall under–what this dude did was treason, and he should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
AxelFoley
@Violet:
And he can go. They have tours at the White House daily.
AxelFoley
@cathyx:
Says the chick with Obama on the brain
PIGL
@Cassidy: the fuck you still doin’ here? I though I told you to go defenestrate yourself from a great height. .
Thlayli
@Ben Franklin:
Typical. The NSA-bashers have convinced themselves that the only reason they’re getting an argument is because this stuff “makes Obama look bad”. It’s so blindingly obvious they’re right that they can’t conceive of anyone disagreeing with them on the substance.
Joey Maloney
@Baud: Such as the one Ford gave Nixon. That worked out pretty well, don’t you think?
Cassidy
@PIGL: Your mother should have sucked more dick around the time of your conception.
Mumbles
@Larv:
Considering that we know he has already lied to his coworkers, his employer, and the US federal government, all under penalty of law, as well as apparently his own girlfriend, in order to aid his personal political agenda, and doing so in a manner in a way that makes no sense *except* as a series of short-term dodges to protect himself, I’d be especially cautious of believing any self-serving statement from him as well.
Steeplejack
@Omnes Omnibus:
With all respect to Anne Laurie’s Hibernian background, mucker has long had a definition more down and dirty than simply “someone you don’t want to cross.” A mucker is a rough or coarse person, usually of unsavory aspect.
Edgar Rice Burroughs, The Mucker (1914):
Enhanced Voting Techniques
@Larv:
Why else would the Russians have given him asylum unless Snowden gave them something in return?
Ben Franklin
No matter how many times the Admin Apology squad are told that Snowden is just the messenger, they still focus on “not hero.traitor” misdirection. The LAW bund must reinforce this as their incomes depend upon swallowing that flounder whole. The rest of the cheerleaders value their commenter placecards, and fear being moved to the table near kitchen.
Address the issues surrounding his disclosures, unless all you want is a diversion for your OP covering all WH derrieres.
Gus diZerega
@Baud: How libertarian of him.
Gus diZerega
@The Sheriff’s A Ni-: Whistle blowing and civil disobedience are different issues with different logics behind them. One is drawing attention to a bad law, the other is exposing lawlessness. And given the bipartisan endorsement of ‘anti-terrorism’ measures that shame the best traditions of this country, the arguments behind civil disobedience are irrelevant.
Gus diZerega
@Enhanced Voting Techniques: To tweak the US is all they would need for it to be worth their while- and they most definitely have tweaked the US.
NR
@burnspbesq: Why stop there? Let’s just put anyone who’s ever said anything bad about Obama in prison. After all, that’s what you guys really want.
Jose Padilla
Does anyone have any facts to support the contention that Snowden was a whistleblower. Who? When? What?
Rex Everything
But Snowden is a libertarian dudebro! Rand must not have gotten the memo.
Corner Stone
I could take pretty much any anti-Snowden comment here, slap some quotes on it and do an attribution to John Bolton, Mike Rogers, Peter King or half a dozen other rwnj’s.
And there would be no difference.
Corner Stone
I find it sad and more than a little pathetic when people keep insisting Snowden should be a latter day Rosa or MLK or he’s a punk/coward.
I wish, in my wish of wishes, I could go back in time and tape the comments these same people would inevitably have about the *actual* MLK or Rosa.
Because there is no doubt but that would be a fuckton of fun.
Corner Stone
Same people would enthusiastically cheer on an Iraq invasion if the current admin said there were aluminum tubes and cake somewhere.
Mumbles
@Ben Franklin:
I’m mostly amused at the idea of WH/Obama Apologists. We spy on other countries, and they spy on us. That’s nothing to be outraged by. It’s how every major country operates, the end.
Maybe it’s just that I’m black, but I’m fully aware of the police state to abuse individuals. New York City had a stated policy of harassing black or Hispanic kids kist walking down the street. New Mexico basically repeatedly raped a guy, because a traffic cop didn’t like the way the guy’s butt looked. But I’m supposed to be shocked because the NSA knows when I called my mother.
Nah, son. That’s not my concern.
Corner Stone
@Mumbles: Well, what are your concerns, then?
Please, tell us. What should we be more concerned about according to “Mumbles”?
Thanks, son.
Corner Stone
I guess if we can’t solve malaria, everywhere in the entire world, then we can’t be concerned about someone sneezing anywhere in the world.
GFY, son.
Larv
@Corner Stone:
And I could take most pro-Snowden quotes and attribute them to any number of glibertarian schmucks with no difference. It’s almost as if not everything maps neatly onto the whole left-right axis. Crazy, I know.
Yes, because prosecuting an admitted criminal for his crimes is the same as consciously manipulating intelligence to bring about a war. Mmm-hmm. Also, it’s both stupid and dishonest to keep characterizing those who disagree with you as Obama apologists. This has fuck-all to do with Obama. Or are you under the impression that surveillance is an innovation of the current administration?
FTR, I would have a lot of sympathy for the view of Snowden as whistleblower if he had managed to restrain himself to revealing just those NSA programs which potentially impact US citizens. But he didn’t do that; instead he decided to also expose a bunch of highly classified (and indisputably legal/constitutional) programs directed at foreign citizens. Unless you think that intelligence gathering is itself immoral, I don’t see how you can justify that. I know it makes you feel all superior to think that your opponents dislike Snowden because he exposed Obama’s surveillance state, but it’s not a claim that stands up to even basic scrutiny.
Corner Stone
@Larv: Every metric we have indicates the shift in attitudes on this topic from the GWB admin to the Obama admin.
You’re free to attempt the argument that this is not because it’s “their guy” running the shop and not because they “trust Obama more than X”, but you will look patently silly when doing so.
Your concluding paragraph is not even worth responding to.
Larv
Feel free to share some of those “metrics”.
Also, I haven’t said a word about my attitude toward surveillance in general, but only my attitude towards Snowden specifically. You’re attempting to elide the difference between the two, but it’s an important one.
BTW, the whole “not worth responding to” BS is a particularly obvious dodge. Especially as the only way you can maintain your attitude of outraged disgust is by ignoring just that argument. Either respond or don’t, but trying to pretend that it’s beneath you just makes you look silly. Patently, even.
Corner Stone
@Larv: Stuff like this, amigo. And there’s a lot more that echo this, in case the goog isn’t your friend.
Partisan Hypocrisy
And further, bullshit. I don’t have to elide anything to maintain my outraged disgust. Your argument makes no sense, in any application of the term.
Hence, the “not worth responding to” part. You’re just wanking.
Larv
@Corner Stone:
Your link is to attitudes about surveillance, not leaking classified information. Again, you’re conflating two separate issues, only one of which I’ve offered an opinion on.
Secondly, the wording in the Pew poll cited in your link isn’t directly comparable. The 2006 question asks about attitudes towards warrantless surveillance, while the 2013 question specifies that it’s done with court orders. It may not be comparing apples to oranges, but it’s at least oranges to tangerines. No doubt others will differ, but my primary objection to Bush’s shenanigans was the warrantless part. But again, that’s secondary to my opinion of Snowden.
Generally, arguments that make no sense are easy to refute. So put up or shut up. Or, you could keep accusing me of wanking while furiously fapping away at yourself, which seems more your style.
Corner Stone
@Larv:
I appreciate you doing all the prep work for me.
You are the one who keeps trying to obfuscate what, exactly, it is you’re feebly wanking an argument about.
Larv
@Corner Stone:
Your powers of transferance are remarkable. I’ve been pretty clear about what I’m arguing, while you just hand-wave your way around them by claiming it’s “not worth responding to”, or “make no sense”, without bothering to explain exactly why. But despite my repeated requests for an actual response, you have the balls to claim I’m the one obfuscating and wanking? LOLs.
Don’t forget to clean up when you’re done, this blog is sticky enough as it is.
Corner Stone
@Larv: Hmmm, make a wankerific argument then howl about someone calling you on your wankerdom.
Please proceed, Larv.
Larv
So either you’ve got nothing or you’re just trolling. In either case, enjoy yourself. If you’re really that desperate for attention, exposing yourself in public is probably more effective and less intellectually taxing.