Eric Holder says Edward Snowden performed a 'public service'

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/30/politics/axe-files-axelrod-eric-holder/index.html

by abhi3 • 10 years ago

233 108 10 years ago

edition.cnn.com

internaut3• 10 years ago

I'm wondering if they're getting ready to pardon him, perhaps with a provision like spending 10 years under house arrest or losing his citizenship. I don't think this could happen under Clinton but Obama might issue a last minute pardon as they tend to do when they leave office. Failing that it is possible Trump might do it as a sign of pragmaticism. He's the only one who could sell it to his supporters, the same might be true of Obama for his people.

Now that time has passed both factions agree it was all inevitable, case of when and not if. That leaves Snowden hanging there as an awkward reminder.

mikeyouse2• 10 years ago

Failing that it is possible Trump might do it as a sign of pragmaticism. He's the only one who could sell it to his supporters, the same might be true of Obama for his people.

Donald Trump would literally hang Snowden:

“I think Snowden is a terrible threat, I think he’s a terrible traitor, and you know what we used to do in the good old days when we were a strong country — you know what we used to do to traitors, right?” Trump said, Politico reported.

mtgx• 10 years ago

Donald Trump says a lot of things on which he doesn't follow through.

internaut3• 10 years ago

That is also possible.

Trump frequently changes his mind though. That's what I was getting at. When he does this his supporters praise him as pragmatic.

You have got to remember that:

He isn't really a typical diehard conservative. It isn't about the specifics of what he says. It's about him feeling he's doing right by America, that is what his supporters are keying into that allows him to circumvent contradictions that would sink another candidate.

Of course you could be right. But if he is all about Make America Great Again it's hard to see how he accomplishes this objective economically without Silicon Valley's backing. SV won't support a president that kills Snowden. Not under any circumstances. He has to know this because he's making a kind of bet against globalization in favour of technology. That falls apart without SV.

On the other hand he could juxtapose SV with the lack of jobs in manufacturing. In that scenario of protectionism and anti technology animus things will get very bad for everybody high and low.

newjersey• 10 years ago

I'm wondering if they're getting ready to pardon him, perhaps with a provision like spending 10 years under house arrest or losing his citizenship. I don't think this could happen under Clinton but Obama might issue a last minute pardon as they tend to do when they leave office. Failing that it is possible Trump might do it as a sign of pragmaticism. He's the only one who could sell it to his supporters, the same might be true of Obama for his people.
Now that time has passed both factions agree it was all inevitable, case of when and not if. That leaves Snowden hanging there as an awkward reminder.

I hope you're right. I am currently thinking about a decidedly unscientific research where they showed "The Colbert Report" to very conservative people (college students? I don't remember the specifics) who had never seen the show before and they thought the persona was real. This is in context with people like the host of NPR's Wait, Wait Don't Tell Me coming on air to say that he might have been living inside a bubble because we got blindsided by Trump's ascendancy.

This is unrelated but I am afraid I might be projecting my own positions and opinions on the candidates. Things like: "Of course, Trump never said bar citizens from entry based on religion". and "Of course, Bernie Sanders understands the issue of wage gap is more nuanced than can be explained in 140 characters https://twitter.com/BernieSanders/status/736649251799732224 "

internaut3• 10 years ago

People have lived in bubbles forever but now with the Net they're encountering oppositional thoughts directly without filtering. This conflict further deepens already existing society division through a kind of memetic assortative mating.

monocasa• 10 years ago

Won't happen. Even as a Senator, Obama was signaling his support of the NSA in his vote in 2008 FISA amendments bill which granted retroactive immunity to telecoms when complying with illegal and unconstitutional search requests from the government. If Obama is secretly on the side of whistleblowers, it's one of the best kept secrets in the world.

d33• 10 years ago

The thing is that he should be rewarded for the public service, not punished.

meursault334• 10 years ago

I hope Obama does something to resolve both the Snowden situation and get Chelsea Manning out of prison before he leaves office. I can't see what the downside is to him of doing the right thing at this point.

athathra• 10 years ago

Sometimes you have to be careful not to get JFK'ed.

dandare4• 10 years ago

What makes you think he is up for the right thing? Serious question.

mwfunk2• 10 years ago

Everyone wants to do the right thing, they just all have different ideas about what the right thing is. There's always hope that people will come around. Not much, but it's all we've got.

Every time someone decides that someone they disagree with isn't trying to do the right thing (at least according to their own judgement), a kitten dies. Also, every time a public official does change their mind about something but gets punished for it by being accused of "flip-flopping", 2 kittens die. Those two things plus money in politics are my personal top 3 reasons for why we can't have nice things (and/or kittens) in US politics.

gogopuppygogo• 10 years ago

Manning isn't the same as Snowden. Lumping them together is a disservice to what Snowden did.

Manning volunteered for the military and gave up some rights as a result. He then distributed data that put lives in danger because he didn't think to clean it up.

Snowden was a private citizen, one who felt his country was not going down the right path. He took time to hatch a plan and release data that he believed wouldn't risk the lives of others.

Snowden deserves a medal not prison.

dandare4• 10 years ago

You are bit mistaken - both Snowden and Manning went through reputable journalists, neither of them dumped any data directly to the public/adversaries. Also saying that if you volunteered for the military you should STFU when you see war crimes is questionable at best.

jbicha• 10 years ago

If Manning is a volunteer, how wasn't Snowden a volunteer too?

Both signed strict non-disclosure agreements to work for the US government. Both gave up rights.

In one way, Snowden served more voluntarily than Manning did, because Snowden could quit but Manning had to fulfill the enlistment term. Had Manning walked off the job exactly like Snowden did, he could easily have been court-martialed just for that, especially as Manning was working in a war zone.

nickpsecurity7• 10 years ago

No, Snowden did exactly what Manning did with the data except took the time to read and organize it per several interviews. Despite being able to filter to domestic only, he instead dumped all NSA's secrets (including foreign operations) he had onto foreign journalists. That's risking operators' lives esp if a foreign, intelligence service our human assets target decides to target those media organizations. Given their results on defense contractors and banks, I'd bet on the foreign spooks getting the Snowden files except for where they were airgapped, guarded day & night in person, and only used by long-time vets.

So, operations blown, tactics exposed, and foreigners having our data on foreign operations. Yes, he burned the shit out of U.S. operations on top of his domestic whistleblowing which I applaud. An example of someone who didn't burn us would be Binney who, knowing all kinds of capabilities, just leaked specific programs and data that were unconstitutional and a threat to citizens' rights.

krapp• 10 years ago

I can't see what the downside is to him of doing the right thing at this point.

It would be political suicide for the Democratic Party and guarantee a Trump victory.

abhi3• 10 years ago

But he'd do it after the election but before a new President is sworn in. Look up Bill Clinton's last day pardons.

anonbanker5• 10 years ago

as if Clinton had a chance against Trump.

It's like the opposite of McCain/Obama in 2008. Trump is the "Hope" candidate, and Clinton is the "dear god, don't let her in the office" candidate.

If anything, it would probably unite the liberal base, But Clinton is a "centrist"; She's trying to win over republicans with her pro-war agenda. She isn't confident in the liberal base being large enough to win an election.

droithomme• 10 years ago

"I think there has to be a consequence for what he has done.""

I agree with Holder on this. Snowden should get a ticker tape parade, the Congressional Medal of Freedom, and the Nobel Peace Prize.

pdkl95• 10 years ago

Babylon 5, S4E21 "Rising Star"

    President Susanna Luchenko: [to Sheridan after his forces free Earth]
        Half of Earth Force wants to give you a kiss on the cheek and the
        Medal of Honor. The other half wants you taken out and shot. As a
        politician you learn how to compromise - which by all rights means
        I should give you the Medal of Honor then have you shot.

msie• 10 years ago

So, when is HN going to introduce "reactions" so I can post a smiley face and clapping hands to this comment?

lewisl90294• 10 years ago

I also agree with this. He should get all that, in addition to a proper trial in court for some of his misconducts, because while I do believe he performed a great public service that sparked a hugely beneficial conversation regarding privacy and government secrecy, he also neglected one of his basic responsibilities as a whistleblower by offloading all the documents he could get his hands on to the press in their original forms without even reading all of them [1], instead of exercising his own discretion and leaking only those documents that he had personally confirmed was of public interest, and performing his own due diligence by redacting any irrelevant sensitive information in those documents to the best of his abilities.

While I can sympathize with the fact that he was probably under a tremendous amount of stress at the time, that probably led to this unfortunate decision, a whistleblower like Snowden simply shouldn't have placed so much blind trust in the media. Letting this slide without any consequences would set a dangerous precedent, regardless of how well the ends justified the means in this case.

[1] http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/apr/06/edward-snowde...

gizmo686• 10 years ago

Snowden didn't release documents to "the media", he gave them to two particular journalists (Glenn Greenwald and Laura Poitras), who did perform due dilligence before releasing documents. This is a well established practice that helps protect against the bias of the leaker from interfering with an objective judgement of what should be redacted.

make3• 10 years ago

I agree. I think however those must come at least with a delay though I'm afraid, realistically, or it would send too much of a double message about how the US treats the sources of it's intelligence leaks. Intelligence safety is still a pretty big deal.. you can't just go and have the president give a medal to the guy responsible for one of the biggest intelligence leaks of all time.

mmaunder2• 10 years ago

I think this is a trial balloon and Holder is acting as a stalking horse for the Obama administration. They're setting up to pardon him if the public approves.

Fede_V• 10 years ago

I would really like for this to be the case, but I kind of doubt it. Let's wait and see.

mmaunder2• 10 years ago

It would be a process and would involve him returning for something resembling a trial but my guess is he could do a lot of preliminary negotiation if the White House was open to it which would involve him serving no time and ending up a hero.

This is the last official statement AFAIK and the language is surprisingly sanguine. http://time.com/3974713/white-house-edward-snowden-petition/

liquidise• 10 years ago

That would be wonderful, but i fear it won't come to pass. The Whitehouse won't, and frankly can't. They have to consider how many other NSA employees hold similar opinions and will consider going public with their information if their administration has anything but a hardline response to the Snowden case.

woodman6• 10 years ago

More prosecutions under the Espionage Act than every prior administration combined... I don't see a pardon in the cards. Also, a trial balloon wouldn't be Holder calling for a trial - that has been said many times by many politicians for a long time.

arcticfox• 10 years ago

How many of those were legitimate though? Except for a very small handful of high profile cases, I have absolutely no idea about the rest of them so I'm genuinely curious.

alanwatts2• 10 years ago

Couldn't it be more advantageous for them to pardon him rather than taking him to trial and risking exposure of the details?

dandare4• 10 years ago

It is unbelievable how (self)censored the mainstream media/politics discussion is. Keith Alexander lied to the congress on record, whistleblowers before Snowden were jailed for blowing the whistle and there was absolutely no chance he could reveal/fix any illegal wrongdoing by the government via the official whistleblowers channels. He did not run away and ruin his sweet life for the lulz, there was clearly no other way. Why is this argument not immediately raised every time some clown uses the "he broke the law, he has to face the music" argument?

tdkl• 10 years ago

Keith Alexander lied to the congress on record

You forgot the war liars/criminals Bush, Rice and Powell.

walrus01• 10 years ago

Kissinger.

blackguardx• 10 years ago

I was under the impression that Powell was a man of integrity and really resented being used by the Bush administration to provide justification for the war. I thought he was just regurgitating the lies told to him.

Edit: Am I being downvoted for expressing my knowledge of the situation? If you think I am wrong, say so. Try to educate me. Downvoting for disagreeing does nothing. When he testified about yellowcake uranium, I thought he believed the reports to be true.

nickpsecurity7• 10 years ago

Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, and Rumsfeld are still on top of my shitlist as far as people that need to be brought to justice for betraying America. Unlike the "harms" Snowden did, their disinformation campaign on Iraq murdered over 6,000 Americans, maimed many more, killed several hundred thousand in Iraq, cost a few hundred billion, and have trillions in long-term liabilities.

I consider Snowden's case a mixed bag depending on which leaks we're talking about. Yet, locking him away for damage to national security without giving the rest life imprisonment doesn't begin to be justice.

vermontdevil• 10 years ago

Petraeus too. Now he's "recovered" and will be a big player in the next administration

qrendel2• 10 years ago

And let's not forget James Clapper.

sgnelson• 10 years ago

You mean Betrayus, who gave away secrets for sex (and in part so that he would look better in his "biography," and most likely turn that into a permanent political career) and received a slap on the wrist.

StanislavPetrov5• 10 years ago

Why is this argument not immediately raised every time some clown uses the "he broke the law, he has to face the music" argument?

Corporate media outlets exist to disseminate propaganda, not seek consistent, logical answers to important questions. They seek to frame the debate in the context constructed by Wall Street and Washington and redirect anger and angst so that people fight against each other instead of against their masters. That's why "identity politics" has become so resurgent in recent years, as the class divide has sharpened and the middle-class has withered. As long as people are polarized and can be pitted against each other on the basis of race, ethnicity, or sexuality, they aren't united against the oligarchs. Its the same exact strategy used by prison guards to maintain control of the prisons. Pit the blacks against the whites against the hispanics and the prison guards can observe safely from the walls. The guards only face a threat from the prisoners when they are united against those who keep them in bondage.

Snowden represents the greatest threat in that regards. If you support Snowden's actions, you are explicitly acknowledging not only that the law is dog shit, but that Snowden was justified in breaking it because of how incredibly repressive the government is. He represents the ultimate repudiation of the system that runs the entire country and most of the world. The corporate media is the voice of this system.

andrei_says_• 10 years ago

Speaking of media, I can't recommend citizenfour enough. An amazing historical document.

cm2012• 10 years ago

Corporate media outlets exist to make money. They will (extremely) happily report on government scandals if the public cares enough to watch. The public doesn't care enough about privacy.

slg2• 10 years ago

Corporate media outlets exist to disseminate propaganda, not seek consistent, logical answers to important questions...

Do you honestly believe this? How do you think an article like this gets written? Do you think that there is some secret puppet master that dictated the talking points of this article or that every journalist including the one who wrote this article is in on some huge conspiracy? Are those options really more likely that some journalists simple have different opinions than you?

tajen• 10 years ago

We should have a National Whistleblower Day and start holding celebrations for it.

I suggest June 10th, if that's the day Snowden left his job. We simply whistle, in every street from Washington to Baghdad, including in Europe.

Edit: Got 9 upvotes from this comment, sounds like there is traction.

alexandercrohde4• 10 years ago

That's definitely an interesting theory. And intentional or not, I think side-battles do deflect attention from the 1% issue (as you called "oligarchs").

However, I think you do a disservice to your cause when you use blanket remarks like "Corporate media outlets exist to disseminate propaganda, not seek consistent, logical answers to important questions" without clarifying. I think we can easily rule out that all corporate news organizations (npr, washington post) are propaganda services (I for one, have a relative who worked at one of those). Perhaps you should try to come up with a theory on why well-intentioned reporters would not see the situation you do (e.g. group think).

ipsin• 10 years ago

Yeah, it's a comical argument, that he should come home and "face justice". You can't even call it just because the judge would probably prohibit a moral defense, and even if the judge did, the jury wouldn't couldn't be told that they could consider anything beyond the law itself.

So Snowden should come home, be robbed of a chance of justice, be robbed of his voice and his freedom, to prove... what, that the NSA was right all along?

nickpsecurity7• 10 years ago

I agree. This is a form of self-censorship in the media to stay tight with Washington. They have special privileges they don't want to loose. They might also be concerned given the reaction of Obama Administration to leakers and anyone supporting them. Cover their ass on top of their normal games.

_shed• 10 years ago

What a bunch of hypocrites! Meanwhile some of the people who sent us to Iraq are getting medals. Disgusting.

woodman6• 10 years ago

What a load of BS. He praises him for "raising the debate", but condemns him for "...the way he did it -- was inappropriate and illegal..." then going on to invite him to "Go to trial, try to cut a deal."

The issue has been brought up many times, with no positive change, because there was no massive dump of incredibly embarrassing evidence. All those hoping for some kind of Obama surprise turn around in the unprecedented level of whistleblower prosecution: you are setting yourself up for disappointment.

w3ightl355• 10 years ago

"...the way he did it -- was inappropriate and illegal..."

What the government was doing (and still is) is inappropriate and illegal. Can't Holder understand or accept the fact that this is why Snowden chose the option that he did? Of course, were matters of law are concerned, I'm not sure Holder is a good source - he after all, let the biggest heist in the civilized world go without consequence to those involved.

asimpletune• 10 years ago

The timing of this statement from Holder is convenient, considering the VICE HBO special that aired last night about Snowden.

jwarren116• 10 years ago

I find Holder's remarks to be ironic. After Operation Fast and Furious [0], I would be tempted to say there's more blood on Holder's hands than on Snowden's hands.

[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Fast_and_Furious

dandare4• 10 years ago

This is outrageous. Thanks for the link.

kilo9• 10 years ago

Snowden is a Hero. And there are few of those around.

alexandercrohde4• 10 years ago

What a confusing remark. He says that both it is a "public service" "but still must pay a penalty." I don't understand what that means, why should one pay a penalty for a public service?

I also think this line "America's interest" is thrown around a lot. Are we talking the interest of Americans? Or interests of the American government? It seems more and more now the two are at odds with each other...

_petronius• 10 years ago

'The state is the name of the coldest of all cold monstrosities. It lies coldly, too; the lie that creeps out of its mouth is this: "I, the state, am the people."' (Nietzsche)

Politics likes to treat the notion of the state as interchangeable with its people, and although I don't think the US is alone in this, it certainly seems to have made an art out of it at times.

ljw1001• 10 years ago

You thought "no good deed goes unpunished" was just a saying? :)

0xcde4c3db• 10 years ago

Sometimes I wonder if keeping the Snowden hero/traitor debate in the media is some kind of psyop to keep us from actually talking about the stuff that he revealed.

pessimizer• 10 years ago

Holder attempts to both have cake, and eat it.

Eric Holder says Edward Snowden performed a 'public service'

Related Stories