5 ms·

As much as I think Ross's sentence is too severe, I wish he would pardon Snowden or Assange instead. You know, people that actually did good for the world and a

As much as I think Ross's sentence is too severe, I wish he would pardon Snowden or Assange instead. You know, people that actually did good for the world and are being punished for it.

thaumasiotes 6y ago
> I wish he would pardon Snowden or Assange instead. ¿Por qué no los dos?
- labster 6y ago
  Because Snowden is a patriot, while Assange is a Russian asset who convinced people to ignore a woman’s story of sexual assault. If pardoned, Snowden would go back to the US and be a productive member of society, while Assange would go back to publishing whatever information his Russian handlers give him.
  - roenxi 6y ago
    These shadowy Russians appear to be on a tireless quest to expose (literal, largely unchallenged) truths to the American public. Why should they be opposed?
    - pfranz 6y ago
      This comes up every time secret information is dropped and applies equally when it's more covertly released. The obvious reason is they get to choose what information, when, and how its disclosed. For example, hack both sides, release one at a damaging time and blackmail the other into compliance. Indiscriminate releasing of information can put people in immediate danger (like embedded spies). You can also drop misinformation into a dump of legitimate information. Or a similar technique where you exaggerate true information because admitting to the truth is embarrassing; like claiming 1,000 civilians were killed when the actual number is closer to 600.
      - roenxi 6y ago
        > Indiscriminate releasing of information can put people in immediate danger (like embedded spies). I cannot resist. So the aforementioned shadowy Russians might be leaking information to themselves via the American press? What dastardly yet disorganised fiends. They could literally just publish the info on the web. If it is largely true, people will believe it. The Russians aren't behind Wikileaks.
  - h0l0cube 6y ago
    > Assange is a Russian asset Do you have anything concrete to back that up? Wikileaks has been foolhardedly devoted to exposing uncomfortable truths about institutions across the political spectrum. Some people are maybe upset that this probably lead to Trump's election. > who convinced people to ignore a woman’s story of sexual assault The preliminary investigation into that case has been dropped. As far as I'm aware, he made no effort to convince people to ignore the story, but he did strongly deny the allegations. This says nothing either way of his innocence or criminality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_Swedish_Prosecution_Authority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_Swedish_Prosecution_... Edit: RE: Anyone questioning Assange's ties to Russia, there's the following article. Assange was purportedly contacted about a pardon in 2017 in exchange for denying Russian involvement into leaking Clinton's emails (which Julian declined) > Lawyers representing the United States at Julian Assange’s extradition trial in Britain have accepted the claim that the WikiLeaks founder was offered a presidential pardon by a congressman on the condition that he would help cover up Russia’s involvement in hacking emails from the Democratic National Committee. Coverage about that here: https://www.thedailybeast.com/us-admits-that-putins-favorite-congressman-offered-pardon-to-assange-if-he-covered-up-russia-links https://www.thedailybeast.com/us-admits-that-putins-favorite...
    - coffeecat 6y ago
      > Do you have anything concrete to back that up? No evidence is needed, as it's not a concrete claim. In modern US political parlance, the term "Russian asset" is a spooky-sounding but otherwise meaningless term. It's a cheap-but-effective rhetorical trick for discrediting someone.
      - h0l0cube 6y ago
        I like the idea that someone can't just say a thing on HN that has no known basis and make it a justification for their argument. Instead, here, any counter claim that Assange is decent, or was guided by good intentions, attracts instant downvotes without any counter argument or reflection whatsoever, but the notion that he's some deep state operative is perfectly reasonable. I agree though with the implication that he isn't an American patriot. Clearly he's Australian/Swedish
  - LockAndLol 6y ago
    Got proof? What are your sources?
  - tsimionescu 6y ago
    While you're absolutely right the Snowden is a wonderful man, your accusations for Assange have no basis. The Swedish investigation had no intention of uncovering the truth about this this woman's possible assault. They endlessly refused any kind of telephonic interview with Assange, even though it is normal practice in Sweden. They were not passionately pursuing justice for a wronged woman - they were idly forcing a man into confinement to help their American allies. This is exactly the finding of the UN special investigator for torture.
  - RavingGoat 6y ago
    Snowden is tough. The China stuff he released wasn't very patriotic.
    - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
      What are you referring to?
  - efortune 6y ago
    There are some murky details about how the Swedish authorities have handled the case of sexual assault Assange have been accused of. Here is an article with some details: https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea...
  - 9HZZRfNlpR 6y ago
    In that case BLM is a Russian asset too since Mueller report revealed us how they ran their biggest social media pages and used the cause as a tool pre election.
kodah 6y ago
At the time I didn't really understand Snowden's motives and it wasn't really clear how right he was. At this point I feel like the writing has left the wall, has copied itself on every build board, every road side, and is probably being flown by an airplane as a banner in the sky. This interview with Glen Greenwald (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qEuKCS-czU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qEuKCS-czU) was what really opened to my eyes to what he was trying to say back then. It sucks I didn't listen. Edited due to poor wording
- hombre_fatal 6y ago
  Well, don't leave us hanging.
  - kodah 6y ago
    This interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qEuKCS-czU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qEuKCS-czU
    - hombre_fatal 6y ago
      In your unedited comment, it just wasn't clear if you ended up thinking he was right or wrong. But I suppose you wouldn't have structured your comment like that if you eventually disagreed with him.
      - kodah 6y ago
        Yeah, sorry about that. Thoughtless wording on my part.
sverhagen 6y ago
Do people consider Snowden and Assange in the same league here? While Snowden seems to have been purely focused on exposing the spying mechanisms to influence that specific debate, it seems that Assange has gone quite a bit more political here? I'm sure my very superficial understanding of these stories gets a lot of details wrong, but didn't Assange purportedly coordinate with the Trump campaign to leak information at a significant time relative to the 2016 election?
- spicyramen 6y ago
  And?
  - sverhagen 6y ago
    And... I would find clemency for Snowden an unexpected and unmitigated success. I would find clemency for Assange somewhat dubious, given the association with the Trump campaign. If that link (between Assange and the Trump campaign) really exists, wouldn't it be just more of Trump's transactional (awarding support or loyalty) pardoning... real or perceived at the least? Edit: clarifications in parenthesis.
    - waheoo 6y ago
      What do you mean by link? What do you mean by transaction? Edit because downvotes usually mean people didn't understand what I meant it in this case probably thought I was getting at something. What link / transaction do you think happened between trump and Assange?
    - CryptoPunk 6y ago
      Yes, but Assange's persecution was so clearly politically motivated that the benefits of a pardon outweigh the cons.
    - newnamenewface 6y ago
      Which connection? So far as I understand it there was no definitional collusion between Trump and Russia specifically but I don't know about Assange.
vmception 6y ago
It's not one or the other. President can do thousands of these at a time, there is no limit.
- jessaustin 6y ago
  In a nation with more prisoners than any other, on earth, in history, presidents (and governors too) certainly should do thousands of pardons at a time.
chx 6y ago
> You know, people that actually did good for the world and are being punished for it. While Assange did some good initially, his ties and conduct regarding Russia makes his case a more complicated one morally. See for example https://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/6/14179240/wikileaks-russia-ties https://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/6/14179240/wikileaks-russia... Of course, with Trump being the money launderer of Russians it wouldn't be a surprise at all if he pardoned Assange.
- thaumasiotes 6y ago
  Russians: they run the full range from "pure evil" to "morally complex". Can someone with ties to Russia achieve anything good? Evidently not.
  - howlgarnish 6y ago
    I had some pretty good borscht today. Slightly more seriously, Russia seems to get no credit for hosting Snowden, who's otherwise being lauded as a hero in these comments. Of course they're doing this to thumb their nose at the US, but the fact that Snowden isn't (apparently) even being pressured to serve his new masters is somewhat surprising.
    - pstuart 6y ago
      My armchair analysis: Snowden would not make an effective puppet (because patriot) and is good enough to host as an FU to the US.
konjin 6y ago
Hilariously enough Trump let the patriot act expire this year, this wasn't covered in the news. You can however bet your last dollar that Biden will re-enact it within his 101 days in office.
- sawjet 6y ago
  He will serve at least 2 years, assuming his health allows it so that Kamala can serve 2 additional terms.
- phobosanomaly 6y ago
  I was curious so I checked it out. I guess it expired in 2015, and a version that somewhat hamstrung the NSA replaced it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act#:~:text=After%20reauthorization%20bills%20failed%20to,expired%20on%20June%201%2C%202015 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act#:~:text=After%20re.... And then section 215 expired this year, but it looks like it was more the House of Reps, than Trump. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/04/yes-section-215-expired-now-what https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/04/yes-section-215-expire... There's just been so much going on this year that stuff gets buried. I'm not willing to give Trump too much credit on this front, since he also normalized use of the military against peaceful domestic protestors for the purpose of cheap PR stunts. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minneapolis-protests-apology/after-rebuke-top-u-s-general-says-joining-trump-church-walk-during-protests-was-mistake-idUSKBN23I264 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minneapolis-protests-apol...
Closi 6y ago
It doesn’t have to be an either or.
input_sh 6y ago
AINAL, but pardons prior to convictions are a grey area. President Ford pardoned Nixon before convictions, but no court contested that, so it can't really be used as a legal precedent. In general, presidents usually pardon someone who's already serving a sentence under a federal law. Snowden and Assange are not. Reality Winner is, and so was Chelsea Manning (pardoned by Obama). Of course, it's Trump we're talking about, so I don't think any sort of prior legal precedents really matters.
- pfarrell 6y ago
  Chelsea Manning wasn’t pardoned by Obama. Her sentence was commuted by him.
AnthonyMouse 6y ago
Accord: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-case-for-a-pardon-of-edward-snowden https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-case-for-a-pardon-of-ed...
supergirl 6y ago
i don’t understand why trump didn’t pardon Assange and Snowden before the election. would have been a classic Trump move. it would shock people, generate free media coverage, make him stand out compared to Bush and Obama, and even get him extra democrat votes. he might have won the election even. i’m curious why he didn’t do it. probably it would upset military staff but he already upset them with pulling out from syria so he’s not afraid of that
- toyg 6y ago
  It would have lost significant amounts of law&order and military-friendly votes. He’s clearly not on good terms with military and intelligence hierarchies, but the wider constituencies still largely vote for him; a move like that would have jeopardized that grassroot vote without really firing up any other base (let’s be honest - dems would not have voted for more years under him, once the pardoning happened... they would have clapped and said “finally something decent” and still voted to change). Now though, it would be a big fuck-you to the establishment figures who fought him internally from day 1, which would suit his image. It could also go some way towards improving his figure in the history books, something most presidents tend to care about once they stop being concerned with everyday political streetfights. It has to be seen if he’s really at that stage though - were he younger, I wouldn’t put past him to challenge again in 4 years.

As much as I think Ross's sentence is too severe, I wish he would pardon Snowden or Assange instead. You know, people that actually did good for the world and are being punished for it.

thaumasiotes 6y ago

> I wish he would pardon Snowden or Assange instead. ¿Por qué no los dos?

labster 6y ago
Because Snowden is a patriot, while Assange is a Russian asset who convinced people to ignore a woman’s story of sexual assault. If pardoned, Snowden would go back to the US and be a productive member of society, while Assange would go back to publishing whatever information his Russian handlers give him.
- roenxi 6y ago
  These shadowy Russians appear to be on a tireless quest to expose (literal, largely unchallenged) truths to the American public. Why should they be opposed?
  - pfranz 6y ago
    This comes up every time secret information is dropped and applies equally when it's more covertly released. The obvious reason is they get to choose what information, when, and how its disclosed. For example, hack both sides, release one at a damaging time and blackmail the other into compliance. Indiscriminate releasing of information can put people in immediate danger (like embedded spies). You can also drop misinformation into a dump of legitimate information. Or a similar technique where you exaggerate true information because admitting to the truth is embarrassing; like claiming 1,000 civilians were killed when the actual number is closer to 600.
    - roenxi 6y ago
      > Indiscriminate releasing of information can put people in immediate danger (like embedded spies). I cannot resist. So the aforementioned shadowy Russians might be leaking information to themselves via the American press? What dastardly yet disorganised fiends. They could literally just publish the info on the web. If it is largely true, people will believe it. The Russians aren't behind Wikileaks.
- h0l0cube 6y ago
  > Assange is a Russian asset Do you have anything concrete to back that up? Wikileaks has been foolhardedly devoted to exposing uncomfortable truths about institutions across the political spectrum. Some people are maybe upset that this probably lead to Trump's election. > who convinced people to ignore a woman’s story of sexual assault The preliminary investigation into that case has been dropped. As far as I'm aware, he made no effort to convince people to ignore the story, but he did strongly deny the allegations. This says nothing either way of his innocence or criminality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_Swedish_Prosecution_Authority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_Swedish_Prosecution_... Edit: RE: Anyone questioning Assange's ties to Russia, there's the following article. Assange was purportedly contacted about a pardon in 2017 in exchange for denying Russian involvement into leaking Clinton's emails (which Julian declined) > Lawyers representing the United States at Julian Assange’s extradition trial in Britain have accepted the claim that the WikiLeaks founder was offered a presidential pardon by a congressman on the condition that he would help cover up Russia’s involvement in hacking emails from the Democratic National Committee. Coverage about that here: https://www.thedailybeast.com/us-admits-that-putins-favorite-congressman-offered-pardon-to-assange-if-he-covered-up-russia-links https://www.thedailybeast.com/us-admits-that-putins-favorite...
  - coffeecat 6y ago
    > Do you have anything concrete to back that up? No evidence is needed, as it's not a concrete claim. In modern US political parlance, the term "Russian asset" is a spooky-sounding but otherwise meaningless term. It's a cheap-but-effective rhetorical trick for discrediting someone.
    - h0l0cube 6y ago
      I like the idea that someone can't just say a thing on HN that has no known basis and make it a justification for their argument. Instead, here, any counter claim that Assange is decent, or was guided by good intentions, attracts instant downvotes without any counter argument or reflection whatsoever, but the notion that he's some deep state operative is perfectly reasonable. I agree though with the implication that he isn't an American patriot. Clearly he's Australian/Swedish
- LockAndLol 6y ago
  Got proof? What are your sources?
- tsimionescu 6y ago
  While you're absolutely right the Snowden is a wonderful man, your accusations for Assange have no basis. The Swedish investigation had no intention of uncovering the truth about this this woman's possible assault. They endlessly refused any kind of telephonic interview with Assange, even though it is normal practice in Sweden. They were not passionately pursuing justice for a wronged woman - they were idly forcing a man into confinement to help their American allies. This is exactly the finding of the UN special investigator for torture.
- RavingGoat 6y ago
  Snowden is tough. The China stuff he released wasn't very patriotic.
  - chordalkeyboard 6y ago
    What are you referring to?
- efortune 6y ago
  There are some murky details about how the Swedish authorities have handled the case of sexual assault Assange have been accused of. Here is an article with some details: https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea...
- 9HZZRfNlpR 6y ago
  In that case BLM is a Russian asset too since Mueller report revealed us how they ran their biggest social media pages and used the cause as a tool pre election.

kodah 6y ago

At the time I didn't really understand Snowden's motives and it wasn't really clear how right he was. At this point I feel like the writing has left the wall, has copied itself on every build board, every road side, and is probably being flown by an airplane as a banner in the sky. This interview with Glen Greenwald (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qEuKCS-czU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qEuKCS-czU) was what really opened to my eyes to what he was trying to say back then. It sucks I didn't listen. Edited due to poor wording

hombre_fatal 6y ago
Well, don't leave us hanging.
- kodah 6y ago
  This interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qEuKCS-czU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qEuKCS-czU
  - hombre_fatal 6y ago
    In your unedited comment, it just wasn't clear if you ended up thinking he was right or wrong. But I suppose you wouldn't have structured your comment like that if you eventually disagreed with him.
    - kodah 6y ago
      Yeah, sorry about that. Thoughtless wording on my part.

sverhagen 6y ago

Do people consider Snowden and Assange in the same league here? While Snowden seems to have been purely focused on exposing the spying mechanisms to influence that specific debate, it seems that Assange has gone quite a bit more political here? I'm sure my very superficial understanding of these stories gets a lot of details wrong, but didn't Assange purportedly coordinate with the Trump campaign to leak information at a significant time relative to the 2016 election?

spicyramen 6y ago
And?
- sverhagen 6y ago
  And... I would find clemency for Snowden an unexpected and unmitigated success. I would find clemency for Assange somewhat dubious, given the association with the Trump campaign. If that link (between Assange and the Trump campaign) really exists, wouldn't it be just more of Trump's transactional (awarding support or loyalty) pardoning... real or perceived at the least? Edit: clarifications in parenthesis.
  - waheoo 6y ago
    What do you mean by link? What do you mean by transaction? Edit because downvotes usually mean people didn't understand what I meant it in this case probably thought I was getting at something. What link / transaction do you think happened between trump and Assange?
  - CryptoPunk 6y ago
    Yes, but Assange's persecution was so clearly politically motivated that the benefits of a pardon outweigh the cons.
  - newnamenewface 6y ago
    Which connection? So far as I understand it there was no definitional collusion between Trump and Russia specifically but I don't know about Assange.

vmception 6y ago

It's not one or the other. President can do thousands of these at a time, there is no limit.

jessaustin 6y ago
In a nation with more prisoners than any other, on earth, in history, presidents (and governors too) certainly should do thousands of pardons at a time.

chx 6y ago

> You know, people that actually did good for the world and are being punished for it. While Assange did some good initially, his ties and conduct regarding Russia makes his case a more complicated one morally. See for example https://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/6/14179240/wikileaks-russia-ties https://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/6/14179240/wikileaks-russia... Of course, with Trump being the money launderer of Russians it wouldn't be a surprise at all if he pardoned Assange.

thaumasiotes 6y ago
Russians: they run the full range from "pure evil" to "morally complex". Can someone with ties to Russia achieve anything good? Evidently not.
- howlgarnish 6y ago
  I had some pretty good borscht today. Slightly more seriously, Russia seems to get no credit for hosting Snowden, who's otherwise being lauded as a hero in these comments. Of course they're doing this to thumb their nose at the US, but the fact that Snowden isn't (apparently) even being pressured to serve his new masters is somewhat surprising.
  - pstuart 6y ago
    My armchair analysis: Snowden would not make an effective puppet (because patriot) and is good enough to host as an FU to the US.

konjin 6y ago

Hilariously enough Trump let the patriot act expire this year, this wasn't covered in the news. You can however bet your last dollar that Biden will re-enact it within his 101 days in office.

sawjet 6y ago
He will serve at least 2 years, assuming his health allows it so that Kamala can serve 2 additional terms.
phobosanomaly 6y ago
I was curious so I checked it out. I guess it expired in 2015, and a version that somewhat hamstrung the NSA replaced it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act#:~:text=After%20reauthorization%20bills%20failed%20to,expired%20on%20June%201%2C%202015 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act#:~:text=After%20re.... And then section 215 expired this year, but it looks like it was more the House of Reps, than Trump. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/04/yes-section-215-expired-now-what https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/04/yes-section-215-expire... There's just been so much going on this year that stuff gets buried. I'm not willing to give Trump too much credit on this front, since he also normalized use of the military against peaceful domestic protestors for the purpose of cheap PR stunts. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minneapolis-protests-apology/after-rebuke-top-u-s-general-says-joining-trump-church-walk-during-protests-was-mistake-idUSKBN23I264 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minneapolis-protests-apol...

Closi 6y ago

It doesn’t have to be an either or.

input_sh 6y ago

AINAL, but pardons prior to convictions are a grey area. President Ford pardoned Nixon before convictions, but no court contested that, so it can't really be used as a legal precedent. In general, presidents usually pardon someone who's already serving a sentence under a federal law. Snowden and Assange are not. Reality Winner is, and so was Chelsea Manning (pardoned by Obama). Of course, it's Trump we're talking about, so I don't think any sort of prior legal precedents really matters.

pfarrell 6y ago
Chelsea Manning wasn’t pardoned by Obama. Her sentence was commuted by him.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago

Accord: https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-case-for-a-pardon-of-edward-snowden https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-case-for-a-pardon-of-ed...

supergirl 6y ago

i don’t understand why trump didn’t pardon Assange and Snowden before the election. would have been a classic Trump move. it would shock people, generate free media coverage, make him stand out compared to Bush and Obama, and even get him extra democrat votes. he might have won the election even. i’m curious why he didn’t do it. probably it would upset military staff but he already upset them with pulling out from syria so he’s not afraid of that

toyg 6y ago
It would have lost significant amounts of law&order and military-friendly votes. He’s clearly not on good terms with military and intelligence hierarchies, but the wider constituencies still largely vote for him; a move like that would have jeopardized that grassroot vote without really firing up any other base (let’s be honest - dems would not have voted for more years under him, once the pardoning happened... they would have clapped and said “finally something decent” and still voted to change). Now though, it would be a big fuck-you to the establishment figures who fought him internally from day 1, which would suit his image. It could also go some way towards improving his figure in the history books, something most presidents tend to care about once they stop being concerned with everyday political streetfights. It has to be seen if he’s really at that stage though - were he younger, I wouldn’t put past him to challenge again in 4 years.