Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

MineralMan

(146,325 posts)
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 12:56 PM Jul 2013

Snowden is neither a traitor or a spy, in my opinion.

The word "traitor" implies the crime of treason, and that crime is very narrowly defined in the Constitution. What Snowden did does not meet that definition. He's not really a spy, either. It's highly doubtful that the briefing slides he absconded with really provide any information not already known to countries like China and Russia. It's all pretty general and of not great value to them.

So, what is he guilty of? He is guilty of taking classified information and distributing it to people not authorized to receive it. It's pretty clear that he did those things, and there doesn't seem to be anyone disputing that. Now, that's a serious thing, and could result in a prison sentence for him if he returns to face trial. How long? I don't know, but I'd guess it would be something on the order of 10 years or so.

With a strong defense team, it's likely that they'd be able to show that a large percentage of the information taken and exposed had already been disclosed in public by the government. I know I recognized much of the information from public releases on most of the programs described in the briefing documents. The collection of metadata, for example, has been understood to be happening for years, if a person was paying attention.

That argument could lead to a determination that the TOP SECRET classification, along with the SI and NOFORN additions, was not really needed. There was, in those briefing slides, some information that wasn't already public, of course, but the defense could make a good case that nothing horribly harmful had been released. All of that will go to decrease the seriousness of the crime and lower the length of the term. Witness Daniel Ellsberg, who was tried AND ACQUITTED for something not dissimilar.

If Snowden returns, he can count on spending some time sitting in a prison or jail cell, even before a trial. Clearly, he'd be seen as a flight risk, so it's unlikely that he'd get released on bail. However, with so many eyes on him and the situation, I would think his treatment will be by the book throughout. Anything less would result in continuing publicity, which is definitely not something desirable to TPTB just now.

If Snowden doesn't return, but ends up accepting asylum in some other country, the US isn't going to go kill him. In fact, his death from any cause would be instantly blamed on the current administration, and I'm certain that would not be considered a desirable outcome. Instead, the US would probably try to extradite him, but would also have an interest in making sure he didn't die in some violent situation or at all. As much as the government would like to use him as an object lesson for others thinking about releasing classified information, his untimely death would have bad results and would not be wanted. The government, better than any one else, knows that nothing really important was revealed and that any harm would be minor from the release of these briefing documents.

The bottom line is, it seems to me, that Snowden would best serve himself by letting the Russians know that he'll be OK with getting on one of the daily Aeroflot flights to NYC. Since he has already achieved "hero" status among many, he can be assured of a strong defense team and delicate treatment by the authorities, I believe. Anyhow, that's what I'd advise him to do, if he asked me. He won't ask me, of course, but that's what I'd suggest as the most practical decision for both the short and long term.

My opinion is that this relatively young man is pretty unsophisticated in his thinking about this whole thing and that he probably got some bad advice from people for whom embarrassing the US is far more important than Snowden's welfare. I suspect he has realized that at this point, too, and is very concerned about his future. And that future will depend on the decisions he makes in the next week or month. I hope he gives his choice a lot of careful consideration. I wish him no ill, although I can't approve of what he did and how he did it.

21 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Snowden is neither a traitor or a spy, in my opinion. (Original Post) MineralMan Jul 2013 OP
Good points. (nt) pinto Jul 2013 #1
Well, after thinking about this for a few days, those MineralMan Jul 2013 #4
The US government has charged him with espionage. gholtron Jul 2013 #2
Charges are just charges. Those often change later MineralMan Jul 2013 #5
This guy has in his possession stolen government computers loaded with classified information. gholtron Jul 2013 #7
He does, and that's a crime, but does not constitute MineralMan Jul 2013 #15
Agreed. He is a patriot! usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jul 2013 #3
No, he's not that, either. MineralMan Jul 2013 #6
Agreed, we won't agree on that, but Whistleblower would be the appropriate legal term. usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jul 2013 #8
Maybe you read a different version of history about Paul Revere than the rest of us. gholtron Jul 2013 #9
In a nutshell, he warned the american people that tyranny was coming... usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jul 2013 #10
The Tyranny? Really? gholtron Jul 2013 #11
Yes, precisely... TYRANNY usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jul 2013 #12
no, he warned about troop movements. Information that was obtained through spy networks. KittyWampus Jul 2013 #14
Exactly, he broke the law of the land, to inform the American people that tyranny was coming. usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jul 2013 #17
No, he informed the revolutionary troops the British troops were coming not an abstraction KittyWampus Jul 2013 #18
Indeed. The two men have almost nothing in common, MineralMan Jul 2013 #19
Tyranny comes in many manifestations usGovOwesUs3Trillion Jul 2013 #21
Well Snowden has, I believe, gotten terrible legal advice and will end up spending grantcart Jul 2013 #13
In any case, we seem to be estimating about the same MineralMan Jul 2013 #16
Good points; I still think if he gets desperate he could sell or otherwise disclose how the NSA AlinPA Jul 2013 #20

MineralMan

(146,325 posts)
4. Well, after thinking about this for a few days, those
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 01:27 PM
Jul 2013

are the conclusions I've reached. I've been following NSA and other intelligence stuff for years, especially since the Internet has made doing so a lot easier. Why? Because I was once involved with all of that, and worked in the NSA building while in the USAF. I had very high level clearances, because of the work I was assigned to do. Note: none of that work had anything to do with domestic intelligence in any way.

And then, there are some precedents, like Ellsberg and others, to provide some background on what might be expected should Snowden stand trial. Once the whole business moves into the court system, everything changes, and an excellent defense team, which Snowden would certainly have, can do much to decrease the severity of the charges. In UCMJ cases, like Manning's that's not so much true, unfortunately for Manning. But Snowden isn't subject to the UCMJ.

Anyhow, that's my thinking this Saturday.

gholtron

(376 posts)
2. The US government has charged him with espionage.
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 01:25 PM
Jul 2013

In his OWN words in an interview with a Chinese newspaper he said that the applied and got the job at Booze Allen for the purpose of exposing the US on spying. That means he planned to steal evidences and he planned, however not very well, to leave the country. He also stole 4 notebook computers that can connect to government servers. If Snowden returns to the US, he will be arrested under the Patriot Act which was before Daniel Ellsberg's time of trial.

MineralMan

(146,325 posts)
5. Charges are just charges. Those often change later
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 01:28 PM
Jul 2013

during the process. They can charge him with whatever they wish. The results may vary from the charges.

gholtron

(376 posts)
7. This guy has in his possession stolen government computers loaded with classified information.
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 01:43 PM
Jul 2013
You're saying that he shouldn't be charged with that? The only thing that is lacking is the trial and conviction.

MineralMan

(146,325 posts)
15. He does, and that's a crime, but does not constitute
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 02:03 PM
Jul 2013

espionage, necessarily. There are many charges he could face. I doubt a charge of espionage will stick, though. It will more likely be a charge having to do with improper access to and distribution of classified materials. I think you do not understand how this sort of thing works. Before the trial begins or the suspect is even in custody, anything can be charged. Faced with an actual trial, those charges often change to a somewhat lesser crime.

An espionage trial would involve releasing even more highly classified information, and that's something the government doesn't wish to do. Again, I don't believe you understand the situation.

 

usGovOwesUs3Trillion

(2,022 posts)
3. Agreed. He is a patriot!
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 01:25 PM
Jul 2013

Edward Snowden is a modern day Paul Revere with a thumb drive full of news that Tyranny is coming!

MineralMan

(146,325 posts)
6. No, he's not that, either.
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 01:29 PM
Jul 2013

But I doubt any discussion with you on that topic would be a waste of time, so I won't engage in it.

 

usGovOwesUs3Trillion

(2,022 posts)
8. Agreed, we won't agree on that, but Whistleblower would be the appropriate legal term.
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 01:44 PM
Jul 2013

on that technical term, at least, we can agree.

gholtron

(376 posts)
9. Maybe you read a different version of history about Paul Revere than the rest of us.
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 01:46 PM
Jul 2013
I don't remember reading about Paul Revere taking government classified information and leaving the country and traveling to a Communist country and revealing those stolen documents.

gholtron

(376 posts)
11. The Tyranny? Really?
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 01:54 PM
Jul 2013
I guess he will warn the Venezuelan or the Bolivian people of their government if he arrives there. I can't WAIT to see what happens if he pulls that crap in either of those countries.
 

usGovOwesUs3Trillion

(2,022 posts)
17. Exactly, he broke the law of the land, to inform the American people that tyranny was coming.
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 02:05 PM
Jul 2013

What do you think the legal authorities of that time considered him?

Face it, Snowden is a Patriot to many Americans, only the red-coats, I mean totalitarians, object.

 

KittyWampus

(55,894 posts)
18. No, he informed the revolutionary troops the British troops were coming not an abstraction
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 02:20 PM
Jul 2013

like 'tyranny'.

Your 1st grade rhetoric and graphics are just silly.

MineralMan

(146,325 posts)
19. Indeed. The two men have almost nothing in common,
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 02:50 PM
Jul 2013

frankly. For one thing, there is not a war to establish the United States as a separate country going on just now. Nor is there a King in charge of the US. The whole tyranny thing is way overstated.

grantcart

(53,061 posts)
13. Well Snowden has, I believe, gotten terrible legal advice and will end up spending
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 02:00 PM
Jul 2013

a decade in jail wondering how it all went south.

While I appreciate your general points I do not believe that there is any similarity between what Ellsberg did and what Snowden did.

Ellsberg leaked a study he helped to author that was aimed at getting the facts together about the development of the policy in Vietnam. It would be hard to argue that any of this was secret to the 'enemy' because, for example, they were quite aware. Moreover Senator Fullbright was passing out copies of the "Pentagon Papers" before they were published by the NYT.

More to the point Ellsberg did not win on legal principle, but on prosecutorial misconduct by the government



On May 9, further evidence of illegal wiretapping against Ellsberg was revealed in court. The FBI had recorded numerous conversations between Morton Halperin and Ellsberg without a court order, and furthermore the prosecution had failed to share this evidence with the defense.[24] During the trial, Byrne also revealed that he personally met twice with John Ehrlichman, who offered him directorship of the FBI. Byrne said he refused to consider the offer while the Ellsberg case was pending, though he was criticized for even agreeing to meet with Ehrlichman during the case.[23]

Due to the gross governmental misconduct and illegal evidence gathering, and the defense by Leonard Boudin and Harvard Law School professor Charles Nesson, Judge Byrne dismissed all charges against Ellsberg and Russo on May 11, 1973 after the government claimed it had lost records of wiretapping against Ellsberg. Byrne ruled: "The totality of the circumstances of this case which I have only briefly sketched offend a sense of justice. The bizarre events have incurably infected the prosecution of this case."[23]




So if Snowden is banking on precedents established in Ellsberg it will be another major miscalculation.

MineralMan

(146,325 posts)
16. In any case, we seem to be estimating about the same
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 02:05 PM
Jul 2013

time to be served. About 10 years seems about right, given the nature of all of this.

AlinPA

(15,071 posts)
20. Good points; I still think if he gets desperate he could sell or otherwise disclose how the NSA
Sat Jul 6, 2013, 02:59 PM
Jul 2013

processes work, going beyond what the NSA does. That information could be valuable to say, al-Qaeda,
or other terrorist organizations, even domestic terrorists who know what is being done, but the "how" is what they need.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Snowden is neither a trai...