6 ms·

Even if Snowden were to return to the US to face "justice," as one of his supporters I would expect nothing more than a show trial. We'd be relying on a legal

Even if Snowden were to return to the US to face "justice," as one of his supporters I would expect nothing more than a show trial. We'd be relying on a legal system that has already been completely compromised to render political outcomes rather than legal ones, and there's too many "powerful" people who have been shown to be terrible liars and dishonest by Snowden's revelations for him to get a fair shake.

diminoten 13y ago
Let's be honest with ourselves for a moment - while not proven, I think we can both agree that Snowden broke the law as it's currently written, and that it'd be trivially easy to prove as such. The only question during this trial would be related to the jury and the judge. Those are the two sets of people who would be able to realistically intervene on Snowden's behalf without risking the federal government's endorsement of leaking privileged information to the public, and even then the judge would be setting an alarming precedent for future cases involving the leak of privileged info.
- wavefunction 13y ago
  I agree that Snowden broke the law on divulging classified materials, as it codified. What I'm concerned about is the show trial where the Administration gets to trot out whatever stories they want to make up about how he provided "aid and comfort to the enemy." Those who want to "get" Snowden have already shown that they have no compunction about lying under oath, so that is where my fear originates.
- PythonicAlpha 13y ago
  I agree, that most probably, Snowden broke the law (I am no expert in US laws). But again: US gov. has double standards. When Snowden breaks a law, he will most likely be hung (or worse), but if members of Us agencies breaks hundred, thousands, even million times laws of human rights and the US constitution, they will be either promoted or get an automatic pardon from the president (as Obama did directly after election). That stinks and is a SHAME for the whole "western world".
  - mpyne 13y ago
    > When Snowden breaks a law, he will most likely be hung (or worse). The U.S. has already declared that the death penalty is off the table...
    - Datsundere 13y ago
      but the patriatic rednecks in washington all want to kill him. I keep hearing in tv about how he 'needs to be shot'
      - Zancarius 13y ago
        I suspect I'd be one of those you'd label a "patriatic [sic] redneck" because I'm right of center and live in a part of the country where so called patriotic rednecks frequent. And I support most of what Snowden has done for the reason that a true patriot upholds the letter of the Constitution, which does not hold true for a majority of the people in power. I would instead appeal to you that they should therefore be considered false patriots.
        PythonicAlpha 13y ago
        Good point! The world is often times more complex than "left" and "right".
        Zancarius 13y ago
        I wish more people understood this. It's fairly easy to condense simple matters into left or right biases but easier still when the purpose is to appease our tribal nature as a species (us versus them). Of course, the latter serves political interests quite nicely and in a manner that helps keep the coffers overflowing. That's not to say that I don't treat some matters as black or white (I do because of my own biases--and when I do, I think I'm right :) ) but it bugs me more than it probably should whenever I see this notion repeated that anyone who shares my political persuasions must, by virtue of our "patriotism," secretly desire a police state. It seems to me that the police state and the true patriot ought to be at odds with each other. Perhaps my understanding is skewed, but I can't think of a patriot who would wish for fewer freedoms, excluding for a moment Orwellian-esque double-speak like the PATRIOT Act... The problem isn't necessarily any one political group as much as it is to do with politicians. The majority of which have been so insulated inside the echo chamber that is Washington DC and so far detached from their constituency for so long that it seems they (and any agency you can imagine that they interact with) feel separate from--and probably above--oversight. If I were in a real conspiratorial mood, I might suggest that the divisive nature of US politics is entirely intentional and serves to keep us apart so that we may not work together to toss the bums in power out onto the street. Sadly, though, I think I've already said enough to invite trollish remarks so I ought to stop while I'm ahead. ;)
- nknighthb 13y ago
  The precedent would only be alarming to authoritarian cowards. Which, if we're also accepting the "law is morality" viewpoint, are people who should be in prison or worse.
tootie 13y ago
> I would expect nothing more than a show trial. Thomas Drake had most of the charges against him dropped and he plead to 1 year probation. A summary of espionage charges under Obama shows that the DOJ has faced an uphill battle in court. http://www.policymic.com/articles/50459/8-whistleblowers-charged-with-violating-the-espionage-act-under-obama http://www.policymic.com/articles/50459/8-whistleblowers-cha...

diminoten 13y ago

Let's be honest with ourselves for a moment - while not proven, I think we can both agree that Snowden broke the law as it's currently written, and that it'd be trivially easy to prove as such. The only question during this trial would be related to the jury and the judge. Those are the two sets of people who would be able to realistically intervene on Snowden's behalf without risking the federal government's endorsement of leaking privileged information to the public, and even then the judge would be setting an alarming precedent for future cases involving the leak of privileged info.

wavefunction 13y ago
I agree that Snowden broke the law on divulging classified materials, as it codified. What I'm concerned about is the show trial where the Administration gets to trot out whatever stories they want to make up about how he provided "aid and comfort to the enemy." Those who want to "get" Snowden have already shown that they have no compunction about lying under oath, so that is where my fear originates.
PythonicAlpha 13y ago
I agree, that most probably, Snowden broke the law (I am no expert in US laws). But again: US gov. has double standards. When Snowden breaks a law, he will most likely be hung (or worse), but if members of Us agencies breaks hundred, thousands, even million times laws of human rights and the US constitution, they will be either promoted or get an automatic pardon from the president (as Obama did directly after election). That stinks and is a SHAME for the whole "western world".
- mpyne 13y ago
  > When Snowden breaks a law, he will most likely be hung (or worse). The U.S. has already declared that the death penalty is off the table...
  - Datsundere 13y ago
    but the patriatic rednecks in washington all want to kill him. I keep hearing in tv about how he 'needs to be shot'
    - Zancarius 13y ago
      I suspect I'd be one of those you'd label a "patriatic [sic] redneck" because I'm right of center and live in a part of the country where so called patriotic rednecks frequent. And I support most of what Snowden has done for the reason that a true patriot upholds the letter of the Constitution, which does not hold true for a majority of the people in power. I would instead appeal to you that they should therefore be considered false patriots.
      - PythonicAlpha 13y ago
        Good point! The world is often times more complex than "left" and "right".
        Zancarius 13y ago
        I wish more people understood this. It's fairly easy to condense simple matters into left or right biases but easier still when the purpose is to appease our tribal nature as a species (us versus them). Of course, the latter serves political interests quite nicely and in a manner that helps keep the coffers overflowing. That's not to say that I don't treat some matters as black or white (I do because of my own biases--and when I do, I think I'm right :) ) but it bugs me more than it probably should whenever I see this notion repeated that anyone who shares my political persuasions must, by virtue of our "patriotism," secretly desire a police state. It seems to me that the police state and the true patriot ought to be at odds with each other. Perhaps my understanding is skewed, but I can't think of a patriot who would wish for fewer freedoms, excluding for a moment Orwellian-esque double-speak like the PATRIOT Act... The problem isn't necessarily any one political group as much as it is to do with politicians. The majority of which have been so insulated inside the echo chamber that is Washington DC and so far detached from their constituency for so long that it seems they (and any agency you can imagine that they interact with) feel separate from--and probably above--oversight. If I were in a real conspiratorial mood, I might suggest that the divisive nature of US politics is entirely intentional and serves to keep us apart so that we may not work together to toss the bums in power out onto the street. Sadly, though, I think I've already said enough to invite trollish remarks so I ought to stop while I'm ahead. ;)
nknighthb 13y ago
The precedent would only be alarming to authoritarian cowards. Which, if we're also accepting the "law is morality" viewpoint, are people who should be in prison or worse.

tootie 13y ago

> I would expect nothing more than a show trial. Thomas Drake had most of the charges against him dropped and he plead to 1 year probation. A summary of espionage charges under Obama shows that the DOJ has faced an uphill battle in court. http://www.policymic.com/articles/50459/8-whistleblowers-charged-with-violating-the-espionage-act-under-obama http://www.policymic.com/articles/50459/8-whistleblowers-cha...