24 ms·

Time to Pardon Edward Snowden?

215 points by freddyym 6y ago

Kednicma 6y ago
This administration won't do it, simply because Russia has more leverage over Snowden's cultural influence while he's unpardoned and in exile. The next administration won't do it, because Biden was in Obama's administration during Snowden's original actions. We need to examine the situation not from whether enough time has elapsed to make the wounds heal over, but from whether our government is ready to admit its past mistakes and learn from them.
- justasking12345 6y ago
  How can you assume that next administration willn't be of Trump's but Biden's ?
  - Supermancho 6y ago
    It doesn't matter. That's the point being made. I think the sentiment that Biden (or any other Democrat) will not act because of some associated guilt or support of past Democrat decisions, idiotic. He will not get pardoned because the media (and public at large) don't think it's an issue that is more motivating than other hot-button issues. If there's enough public support, I would be more ready to believe the needle will move under a D than an R.
  - nwsm 6y ago
    Because that scenario is irrelevant to the conversation
- 082349872349872 6y ago
  One of the rationales for the Ministry of Truth in 1984 was that the government could always do the right thing: as soon as it learned, it needn't take the difficult step of admitting past mistakes, but could instead merely correct them.
trident1000 6y ago
The reason he will never be pardoned has nothing to do with if his leaks were merited or not merited (they clearly were as the activities of the govt were proven illegal). Its because then you green light a govt leaker in critical programs you open pandoras box for govt secrets spilling out and you can lose control. Keeping employees/contractors in fear that they will never stop chasing you is a good way to stop people from doing this.
- avmich 6y ago
  > Keeping employees/contractors in fear that they will never stop chasing you is a good way to stop people from doing this. This is contradicting to the idea of government existing for people and serving people. If government uses fear to reduce accountability, it needs to be changed.
  - dustingetz 6y ago
    "it needs to be changed", as in, someone else should change it but not you (I am merely pointing out the paradox of inaction. Enacting change is a lot of work, so one must first decide to contribute actual work, then figure out what actual work needs to be done, then do the work and measure the result. Work = force * displacement and if nothing is displaced, no work has been achieved. Rosa Parks wanted change so she did the work. Snowden wanted change so he did the work.)
    - colordrops 6y ago
      One of the best levers many of us have is public forums, so this commenter is doing something great - enforcing the idea that the government should be changed in thousands of readers' minds. Once an idea gets enough traction, it often can turn into actual change. You are only reenforcing the fatalism you seem to criticize.
      - mch82 6y ago
        You’re both right. Colordrops is correct: comments matter because they help shape public opinion. Dustingertz is also correct: governments & political parties have published processes for changing & enforcing policy. Citizens who read the docs & use those processes can achieve a lot.
HashingtheCode 6y ago
If Assange isn't being pardoned for the nonsensical "crime" of exposing war crimes by the US Government, there is no chance that Snowden will be pardoned. Snowden willingly stole state secrets whereas Assange only published. Still, when you consider that Snowden is living in Russia, essentially free, and Assange is in a 3.5x2m cell, I don't think Snowden has anything to worry about, except that the royalties from his book will be taken away....but he has his freedom. https://www.npr.org/2020/10/01/919261319/court-rules-edward-snowden-must-pay-more-than-5-million-from-memoir-and-speeches https://www.npr.org/2020/10/01/919261319/court-rules-edward-...
- chiefalchemist 6y ago
  As I understand it, the USA isn't after Assange for publishing, mainly because other (friends of the state?) entities have done similar (e.g., NY Times). Assange is being charged with conspiracy to steal said secrets. That is, he was a participant in the "theft." Uncle Sans case isn't focused on the publishing. Again, as I understand it (which I believe is based on other comments from previous threads on HN).
- cryptica 6y ago
  They should both be pardoned. They committed no crime. The public has the right to know what their governments are doing using their money.
  - HashingtheCode 6y ago
    > They have committed no crime Not true. Assange hasn't committed a crime but Snowden has committed a crime of theft from the NSA; unlawfully retaining a National Security Agency (NSA) documents containing information classified at the TOP SECRET/SENSITIVE COMPARTMENTED INFORMATION (TS/SCI) level. Let me clarify. What he did in exposing PRISM was fantastic, the people had a right to know, absolutely, but, the act in itself was still stealing. It's no different to any other theft. When you work for a company and you steal, you can be prosecuted. We can argue from two points; moral and legal. Morally he did the right thing. Legally he did not. The difference between Assange and Snowden is vast. Assange is a published of information, no different to The Guardian. He did not steal the data he published. Snowden did, as did Chelsea Manning when he stole the known as Cable Gate. The point in the article is that the OP thinks Snowden should receive a pardon. My point, is that Assange hasn't even been pardoned for his supposed crime of publishing. If Assange hasn't been pardoned for a lesser crime, then what hope does Snowden have of being pardoned for an actual crime of data theft from the NSA? Another lady stole data from the NSA. SHe is now facing prosecution and 10 years. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/west-virginia-woman-admits-willful-retention-top-secret-national-defense-information-and https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/west-virginia-woman-admits-wi...
ChicagoDave 6y ago
Snowden didn’t just expose national wiretapping. He also exposed international spying capabilities that endangered our people and our allies. If he had not crossed that second line, he’d just be a legitimate whistleblower, but he decided to actively harm the U.S. intelligence community and they will never allow a pardon. I’d lay odds if he ever steps foot in an unprotected setting, a slip on a banana peel and a fatal head injury wouldn’t shock me. He’s a traitor. I’m as liberal as it gets and even I think he went too far.
- pravda 6y ago
  Nah. He's a hero.
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  He couldn't expose one without the other could he?
  - cloverich 6y ago
    I remember him specifically saying he thought spying on allies was wrong, and even a key component of his decision. Whether you agree this is the deciding point for crime / not crime, it is certainly a division between blowing whistle on domestic spying and everything else.
    - LatteLazy 6y ago
      I think that from a purely technical point of view there isn't a division here: if the NSA has gained access to basically everything (mobile networks, ISPs, landlines, OSs etc) and they're using the access to hoover up all the private data of citizens then logically our allies and enemies know they are also being targeted don't they? Why would the NSA be using God Mode domestically but restricting itself abroad? So Snowden even revealed everything or nothing. He couldn't only spill half the beans!
  - lern_too_spel 6y ago
    Why not? 99% of the things Greenwald et al published from his leaks were perfectly legal, and that was just a small subset of the total documents Snowden leaked. Why not just expose the illegal phone metadata program? If he had done that, he would easily qualify as a whistleblower.
salimmadjd 6y ago
Three bipartisan legislations were introduced yesterday related to this. https://mobile.twitter.com/_nalexander/status/1312405442925154304 https://mobile.twitter.com/_nalexander/status/13124054429251...
- jessaustin 6y ago
  I was so glad I had the opportunity to vote for her.
realjohng 6y ago
Edward Snowden is an American patriot. He followed his conscience and acted in good faith to defend the constitutional rights of the American people.
- georgeplusplus 6y ago
  Disagree. I think he’s a tool of Russia and got paid to tarnish America and diplomacy worldwide.
  - scrozart 6y ago
    Reddit is leaking.
  - snypher 6y ago
    >diplomacy
  - chrisco255 6y ago
    He simply tarnished certain federal bureaucracies, not America at large.
    - georgeplusplus 6y ago
      I live in Germany and When I moved here I sensed animosity for America. When I asked my local friends they said It was made a lot worse after what he leaked.
      - chrisco255 6y ago
        That may be true, but that's the fault of the 3 letter agencies and not the fault of Snowden.
  - ahelwer 6y ago
    If the reality of what we are doing to our citizens tarnishes our reputation, then we shouldn't be doing it.
  - 6y ago
Tepix 6y ago
Half way into that article it suddenly opened another window and loaded another seemingly unrelated article. A way to get more page imoressions?
i7ofi9 6y ago
the cia snitch deserves to get stitches. the nsa should never hire from the cia. the cia is the human resources department of america. they are boring and nosy people, but we keep making movies about them for some reason. they are dishonest unlike the nsa.
627467 6y ago
Say Biden wins the election. I'm curious to see how his administration would handle this situation considering that Snowden revelations happened dead in the middle of Biden's second vice-presidency and they had plenty of time to be considerate, and handle this situation appropriately.
dirtnugget 6y ago
> he fled immediately to Russia He did not flee to Russia. He got stuck there on transit to Ecuador because his passport was allegedly cancelled. He came from Hong Kong. Read his book.
- seppin 6y ago
  So he just got lucky in that his stopover was in one of the few countries on Earth that wouldn't extradite him? What a coincidence. Is that why he was at the Russian consulate in HK a few days before, and in constant contact with the lawyer from Wikileaks (a Russian Intel cutout)? Come on.
doopy1 6y ago
You would need to convict him first.
- stjohnswarts 6y ago
  that's not how pardons have to work. You can be pardoned post conviction or preemptively. I'm glad I could update you on that. See Abraham Lincoln's and Gerald Ford's pardons in particular.

215 points by freddyym 6y ago

This administration won't do it, simply because Russia has more leverage over Snowden's cultural influence while he's unpardoned and in exile. The next administration won't do it, because Biden was in Obama's administration during Snowden's original actions. We need to examine the situation not from whether enough time has elapsed to make the wounds heal over, but from whether our government is ready to admit its past mistakes and learn from them.

justasking12345 6y ago
How can you assume that next administration willn't be of Trump's but Biden's ?
- Supermancho 6y ago
  It doesn't matter. That's the point being made. I think the sentiment that Biden (or any other Democrat) will not act because of some associated guilt or support of past Democrat decisions, idiotic. He will not get pardoned because the media (and public at large) don't think it's an issue that is more motivating than other hot-button issues. If there's enough public support, I would be more ready to believe the needle will move under a D than an R.
- nwsm 6y ago
  Because that scenario is irrelevant to the conversation
082349872349872 6y ago
One of the rationales for the Ministry of Truth in 1984 was that the government could always do the right thing: as soon as it learned, it needn't take the difficult step of admitting past mistakes, but could instead merely correct them.

trident1000 6y ago

The reason he will never be pardoned has nothing to do with if his leaks were merited or not merited (they clearly were as the activities of the govt were proven illegal). Its because then you green light a govt leaker in critical programs you open pandoras box for govt secrets spilling out and you can lose control. Keeping employees/contractors in fear that they will never stop chasing you is a good way to stop people from doing this.

avmich 6y ago
> Keeping employees/contractors in fear that they will never stop chasing you is a good way to stop people from doing this. This is contradicting to the idea of government existing for people and serving people. If government uses fear to reduce accountability, it needs to be changed.
- dustingetz 6y ago
  "it needs to be changed", as in, someone else should change it but not you (I am merely pointing out the paradox of inaction. Enacting change is a lot of work, so one must first decide to contribute actual work, then figure out what actual work needs to be done, then do the work and measure the result. Work = force * displacement and if nothing is displaced, no work has been achieved. Rosa Parks wanted change so she did the work. Snowden wanted change so he did the work.)
  - colordrops 6y ago
    One of the best levers many of us have is public forums, so this commenter is doing something great - enforcing the idea that the government should be changed in thousands of readers' minds. Once an idea gets enough traction, it often can turn into actual change. You are only reenforcing the fatalism you seem to criticize.
    - mch82 6y ago
      You’re both right. Colordrops is correct: comments matter because they help shape public opinion. Dustingertz is also correct: governments & political parties have published processes for changing & enforcing policy. Citizens who read the docs & use those processes can achieve a lot.

HashingtheCode 6y ago

If Assange isn't being pardoned for the nonsensical "crime" of exposing war crimes by the US Government, there is no chance that Snowden will be pardoned. Snowden willingly stole state secrets whereas Assange only published. Still, when you consider that Snowden is living in Russia, essentially free, and Assange is in a 3.5x2m cell, I don't think Snowden has anything to worry about, except that the royalties from his book will be taken away....but he has his freedom. https://www.npr.org/2020/10/01/919261319/court-rules-edward-snowden-must-pay-more-than-5-million-from-memoir-and-speeches https://www.npr.org/2020/10/01/919261319/court-rules-edward-...

chiefalchemist 6y ago
As I understand it, the USA isn't after Assange for publishing, mainly because other (friends of the state?) entities have done similar (e.g., NY Times). Assange is being charged with conspiracy to steal said secrets. That is, he was a participant in the "theft." Uncle Sans case isn't focused on the publishing. Again, as I understand it (which I believe is based on other comments from previous threads on HN).
cryptica 6y ago
They should both be pardoned. They committed no crime. The public has the right to know what their governments are doing using their money.
- HashingtheCode 6y ago
  > They have committed no crime Not true. Assange hasn't committed a crime but Snowden has committed a crime of theft from the NSA; unlawfully retaining a National Security Agency (NSA) documents containing information classified at the TOP SECRET/SENSITIVE COMPARTMENTED INFORMATION (TS/SCI) level. Let me clarify. What he did in exposing PRISM was fantastic, the people had a right to know, absolutely, but, the act in itself was still stealing. It's no different to any other theft. When you work for a company and you steal, you can be prosecuted. We can argue from two points; moral and legal. Morally he did the right thing. Legally he did not. The difference between Assange and Snowden is vast. Assange is a published of information, no different to The Guardian. He did not steal the data he published. Snowden did, as did Chelsea Manning when he stole the known as Cable Gate. The point in the article is that the OP thinks Snowden should receive a pardon. My point, is that Assange hasn't even been pardoned for his supposed crime of publishing. If Assange hasn't been pardoned for a lesser crime, then what hope does Snowden have of being pardoned for an actual crime of data theft from the NSA? Another lady stole data from the NSA. SHe is now facing prosecution and 10 years. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/west-virginia-woman-admits-willful-retention-top-secret-national-defense-information-and https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/west-virginia-woman-admits-wi...

ChicagoDave 6y ago

Snowden didn’t just expose national wiretapping. He also exposed international spying capabilities that endangered our people and our allies. If he had not crossed that second line, he’d just be a legitimate whistleblower, but he decided to actively harm the U.S. intelligence community and they will never allow a pardon. I’d lay odds if he ever steps foot in an unprotected setting, a slip on a banana peel and a fatal head injury wouldn’t shock me. He’s a traitor. I’m as liberal as it gets and even I think he went too far.

pravda 6y ago
Nah. He's a hero.
LatteLazy 6y ago
He couldn't expose one without the other could he?
- cloverich 6y ago
  I remember him specifically saying he thought spying on allies was wrong, and even a key component of his decision. Whether you agree this is the deciding point for crime / not crime, it is certainly a division between blowing whistle on domestic spying and everything else.
  - LatteLazy 6y ago
    I think that from a purely technical point of view there isn't a division here: if the NSA has gained access to basically everything (mobile networks, ISPs, landlines, OSs etc) and they're using the access to hoover up all the private data of citizens then logically our allies and enemies know they are also being targeted don't they? Why would the NSA be using God Mode domestically but restricting itself abroad? So Snowden even revealed everything or nothing. He couldn't only spill half the beans!
- lern_too_spel 6y ago
  Why not? 99% of the things Greenwald et al published from his leaks were perfectly legal, and that was just a small subset of the total documents Snowden leaked. Why not just expose the illegal phone metadata program? If he had done that, he would easily qualify as a whistleblower.

salimmadjd 6y ago

Three bipartisan legislations were introduced yesterday related to this. https://mobile.twitter.com/_nalexander/status/1312405442925154304 https://mobile.twitter.com/_nalexander/status/13124054429251...

jessaustin 6y ago
I was so glad I had the opportunity to vote for her.

realjohng 6y ago

Edward Snowden is an American patriot. He followed his conscience and acted in good faith to defend the constitutional rights of the American people.

georgeplusplus 6y ago
Disagree. I think he’s a tool of Russia and got paid to tarnish America and diplomacy worldwide.
- scrozart 6y ago
  Reddit is leaking.
- snypher 6y ago
  >diplomacy
- chrisco255 6y ago
  He simply tarnished certain federal bureaucracies, not America at large.
  - georgeplusplus 6y ago
    I live in Germany and When I moved here I sensed animosity for America. When I asked my local friends they said It was made a lot worse after what he leaked.
    - chrisco255 6y ago
      That may be true, but that's the fault of the 3 letter agencies and not the fault of Snowden.
- ahelwer 6y ago
  If the reality of what we are doing to our citizens tarnishes our reputation, then we shouldn't be doing it.
- 6y ago

Tepix 6y ago

Half way into that article it suddenly opened another window and loaded another seemingly unrelated article. A way to get more page imoressions?

i7ofi9 6y ago

the cia snitch deserves to get stitches. the nsa should never hire from the cia. the cia is the human resources department of america. they are boring and nosy people, but we keep making movies about them for some reason. they are dishonest unlike the nsa.

627467 6y ago

Say Biden wins the election. I'm curious to see how his administration would handle this situation considering that Snowden revelations happened dead in the middle of Biden's second vice-presidency and they had plenty of time to be considerate, and handle this situation appropriately.

dirtnugget 6y ago

> he fled immediately to Russia He did not flee to Russia. He got stuck there on transit to Ecuador because his passport was allegedly cancelled. He came from Hong Kong. Read his book.

seppin 6y ago
So he just got lucky in that his stopover was in one of the few countries on Earth that wouldn't extradite him? What a coincidence. Is that why he was at the Russian consulate in HK a few days before, and in constant contact with the lawyer from Wikileaks (a Russian Intel cutout)? Come on.

doopy1 6y ago

You would need to convict him first.

stjohnswarts 6y ago
that's not how pardons have to work. You can be pardoned post conviction or preemptively. I'm glad I could update you on that. See Abraham Lincoln's and Gerald Ford's pardons in particular.