Eric Holder: Edward Snowden Performed "Public Service"

Funny how these guys change their tune once they're out of office and away from the politics of DC. Holder still says Snowden should stand trial for the consequences of what he's done and go to prison but the judge should take into account the public service he did.

What wait? You can't say he did the country a service AND want him in prison. Well, I guess they don't change their tune THAT much because he still supports prosecuting whistle blowers.

While the man did do something for the country that is true. However, he did violate several laws in the process, and ultimately should face trial and take the punishment for such.

However, no one wants a trial, the federal government does not, cause then more of their dirty laundry would come out and the government will not want that. Nor does Snowden want a trial, cause he knows he would end up in prison or far worse. Ultimately he is stuck between a rock and a hard spot, and his only hope would be for the President to pardon him.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

he is accused of committing a crime by exposing a greater crime........

in my book it is not a crime to expose a greater crime,

if we want accountability in our government we ought to encourage whistleblowers like him.

the concept that we would charge someone a traitor for telling those he is supposedly betraying of injustices being done to them, is so ass backwards its a wonder there are people on earth who dont just outright "get it"

Yet Eric did say Snowden still needs to pay for his "crimes".

a reply to: Swills

Go to trial...try to cut a deal...I think there needs to be consequences for what he's done but I think that in deciding what an appropriate sentence should be, the Judge should take into account the usefulness in having that national debate

I don't think Snowden would return to the States if any deal resulted in prison time because lets be honest, when it comes to apparent breaches in National Security, I'd like a debate on which out of Snowden or Clinton put the US more at risk.

My initial reaction was that this is the first volley from the US to try an coax Snowden into a false sense of security to get him to return. Thereafter car crash suicide from gun shot wound-type-ending.

I also have no doubt that he has a very powerful insurance policy somewhere to be released upon his untimely death.

Snowden exposed the US government deception of spying and lying and showed the true colors of the Administration and Pentagon even in their attitudes towards allies. I see zero evidence that any information he has released has caused actual breaches in National Security that has resulted in attacks and deaths of innocent Americans.

What I do see however is plenty of evidence that the US government has been active in spying on it's citizens, starting wars in the Middle East and generally being overzealous in their interference in foreign lands while ignoring their own country and citizens.

What if Eric Holder wasn't talking about Snowden ...

What if he was really sending a message to Hillary?

originally posted by: Swills

Funny how these guys change their tune once they're out of office and away from the politics of DC. Holder still says Snowden should stand trial for the consequences of what he's done and go to prison but the judge should take into account the public service he did.

What wait? You can't say he did the country a service AND want him in prison. Well, I guess they don't change their tune THAT much because he still supports prosecuting whistle blowers.

Notice he didn't say what service. One of the consequences of this was a tightening of secret information with third party vendors. This change has made it more difficult for countries like China. They didn't have to get in to the state department only get hired by one of its vendors. That has changed and background checks are required of anyone that might have access. Trust me when I say Eric holder believes in keeping secrets. So he may see him as helping to secure those secrets from forign national s .

a reply to: pryingopen3rdeye

Exactly. Anyone who thinks he's committed a crime should ask themselves how exposing criminal activity is a crime in and of itself. Because the people who claim he's a traitor for what he did are also the same people who say "If you see something, say something." Well, he saw something and said something and now he's labeled a traitor for it by the same people he exposed. How anyone can't see who the criminals are in that equation baffles me.

a reply to: pryingopen3rdeye

There are ways to be a whistle blower in the government, laws that would protect him. But, he did take and reveal classified information, and that is against the law. Any time you go through and get a security clearance, it is written in the paperwork that one must sign, that if a person reveals such, they can and will be fined and go to jail, and gives the laws that are applied to such.

While as noble as it was that he acted, the reality is that he did break the law in doing such. Even Daniel Ellsberg, was charged, and the only reason why the man did not go to prison was due to the fact the government botched the trial and the charges were dismissed.

The only way to end this, would be for Snowden to come home and face trial, for better or for worse.

a reply to: Swills

Funny seeing Holder point his finger at others and say they should pay, but the treason and betrayals he committed against the American people is not even entering his mind. That's because of his unsurpassed arrogance and hypocrisy.

He is a shining example of why we should bring back duels to the death in this country.

a reply to: pryingopen3rdeye
Agreed, it`s never a crime to expose a crime anyone who says it is is probably the person or persons who are committing the crime and they don`t want to be exposed.

Just came by to see how many people bring up Fast & Furious, Obama and Hillary.

I kind of had a feeling the discussion would very quickly be turned away from Snowden an onto how a bunch of other people should be locked up in jail.

As for Snowden? I don't know if we'll ever get any kind of definite proof of any actual lives that were lost because of his breach of national security. I'm pretty sure none of the "secrets" he leaked are anything our foreign adversaries weren't already aware of.

Other countries like Russia and China have their own intelligence services and know far more than the average American about what our NSA is up to.

originally posted by: pryingopen3rdeye
a reply to: sdcigarpig

he is accused of committing a crime by exposing a greater crime........

in my book it is not a crime to expose a greater crime,

if we want accountability in our government we ought to encourage whistleblowers like him.

the concept that we would charge someone a traitor for telling those he is supposedly betraying of injustices being done to them, is so ass backwards its a wonder there are people on earth who dont just outright "get it"

This is also what creates revolutionaries..

If there can't be real justice or change through the system.

a reply to: pryingopen3rdeye

He didn't commit a crime under the Whistle Blower Act. His detractors will accuse him of selling secrets to China and Russia but they have no proof but they never needed facts to support their agendas to begin with.

a reply to: Swills

Snowden should not return to the United States, until or unless a government is formed whose interests are those of the people.

Snowden is a man who recognises that the public interest, and the national interest are two very different concepts. The public interest, the needs of the population to be informed about threats to their liberty, were served by Snowden making the revelations that he did. The national interest, that is the desire of the state to be able to operate without scrutiny or effective oversight for its own, automatically invalid reasons, were not served by his actions, far from it.

Only when the public interest is the only formative factor which shapes the national interest, will it be safe for him to return to the nation he loves. Much is made of the fact that he has taken residence in Russia. The ill informed point at him at call him a hypocrite for living there, despite the fact that his passport being cancelled while he was waiting for a flight out, is the only reason he ended up staying as long as he has in the first place.

Holder was a part of a broken machine, a system which does not serve the public, it's interests, or its liberty, freedom, or any similar defining concept. You will note that those who insist that Snowden faces the legal ramifications of his actions, are very much in love with the law. But in the same way as the national interest, and the public interest are not like concepts, nor are law and justice. Law is a lumbering idiot, operating by the numbers, cold, dispassionate, flawed, and crucially is a concept which allows for a thing to only be legal, or illegal. Justice however, is a noble, perfect concept. It is fast, pure, compassionate, and interested only in what is right, and what is wrong.

Justice absent the fumbling idiocy of law, would find that Snowden is nothing but a patriot, a lover of freedom and liberty, and a staunch defender of the founding principles of the United States of America. The public interest would be best served by having unfettered access to the resource, the asset of his mind, his thinking, and his knowledge of how things are done, and how to make systems better for those they are designed to protect, rather than for those who administrate those programs.

To my mind, America would be better off with Snowden at home, where he can be locally active and galvanise people toward the goal of root and branch alteration of the priorities, direction, and administration of cyber intelligence operations, where he can be active in trying to motivate people to demand power be taken from the state and place back where it belongs, in the laps of the population. He understands, better than anyone I have read the work of in the last twenty years, the importance of freedom and liberty within a society, and crucially, that the greatest threat to any persons liberty and freedom comes not from death at the hands of terrorism, but being forced to live under excessive observation and control. He understands that liberty has risks, that those risks are to be taken gladly, and that none should wish to hide away from those risks, if the cost of doing so is the loss of freedom.

Many of those who seem to be in love with the idea of prosecuting him, seem to think his actions were somehow immoral. If that be the case, then all the founding fathers of America should be disgraced, and ownership of a copy of the constitution should be a treason offence. One cannot suggest that one mans insistence on upholding the constitution at all costs, is any more offensive than the creation of the document itself. The reality is, that Snowden is a hero to anyone who respects the concepts of freedom and liberty, in any nation. If there is a nation on this earth that could find genuine and not at all political reasons to incarcerate, or even place him on trial, then that nation clearly has lost sight of freedom and liberty as concepts, leave alone as founding principles.

a reply to: Swills

In my opinion, government whistle blowers like Snowden are the country's true patriots. They risk jail time and their life to expose government corruption. Without whistleblowers, government's can abuse citizen's rights and eventually gain too much power. Obama's record of attacking whistleblowers is the worst of any president.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Tell me again what did he do for the country? This guy sells out the nation giving state secrets away and he's glorified on these pages.
Hillary had emails addressed to her regarding state business and because her hardware isn't govt approved she should receive a lethal injection after being pilloried for a month.

It makes no sense to me.

a reply to: pryingopen3rdeye

That's your book. Law books say differently. The man is a criminal and a traitor. He needs to rot in jail. Benedict Arnold.

a reply to: pryingopen3rdeye

And on the other side we don't understand how you just don't get that he is a criminal. Even Steven I guess.

So the bank robbers reveal where the bank has security weaknesses. They should be rewarded right?