whether Snowden has his own copies of the correspondence?

Or is someone holding them for him possibly? If he has them, wouldn't making then public help to settle some arguments?

forgot to take evidence of his "whistleblowing."

And here is my theory as to why Snowden did not download his emails...

I don' think Snowden originally intended to seek asylum. If you have read the book, the decision to leave his hotel and seek a safe house in Hong Kong was made at the last minute with assistance from human rights attorneys that he had never met or spoken to before.

He didn't take the emails because he never anticipated his current position.

But Snowden has not claimed that he explored all the ordinary whistle-blower channels, or that he would be shielded by whistleblower laws. He knew his goals required him to go public, and he knew that the emails in question wouldn't help him avoid prosecution or conviction under the Espionage Act. So he might have seen no urgency in preserving them.

somewhere, that was a shocking lack of foresight or even common sense...

What exactly did he think was going to happen once he lifted the last files and took an extended sick leave?

and also reading the book, I think he expected to be arrested. I don't think he meant to seek asylum, at all. And thus his line about not hiding from justice.

When the press descended on Hong Kong, 3 human rights attorney's based in Hong Kong, volunteered their services. Snowden accepted and he was taken to a safe house. I believe that is when the strategy of asylum was hatched.

with the three human rights attorneys and how that ended up with a flight bound for Moscow...

Last edited Sun Jun 1, 2014, 02:51 PM - Edit history (1)

I suspect that Snowden has copies, and has baited NSA. I suspect that this email was the least damaging to NSA and that's why they "found" it.

Snowden is in the catbird seat. There's nothing they can do aside of assassination. But he already had considered that possibility and was willing to take the risk for love of country.

edit to add: I doubt he has hard copies with him. They're probably stashed somewhere.

whether Snowden has them or not. Just to get ahead of the story.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
but I think the BIG story... NSA surveillance, is not being covered.

....they might be better be more afraid of what he COULD release.

The great preponderance of the documents has NOT been released, some of it because it would be too harmful in some way. Lawyers and journalists have culled that stuff out.

But it's still there, in someone's hands.

it may be encrypted... but it is somewhere. Unless the phone company deleted it. Or someone hacked the phone company and deleted it.

documents?

Just part of it. Do you at least think that what I do include in my summary is accurate?

using the word "false." I'd prefer to comment on the former.

he sent the email, and you have presented this uncritically as a "fact." Thus...you are not focusing on facts so much as subjective explanations for actions.

It would be more useful if you simply listed when actions took place, and then began a conversation about "why."

But that's not very helpful to ES.

Could you quote me please?

but on claims. Why not list facts? Start with actions.

It is a fact that he made those claims.

They will time it in a way to discredit Snowden.

We know Snowden did not bring up specific concerns because he's not in jail. He had to have brought up vague queries.

Dream on.

Oh, they could fabricate something, or assassinate him.

He still would have achieved his goal of starting a national conversation.

I doubt they want to make him a martyr.

Are you kidding me?

You're talking about it, I'm talking about it, the media, the Internet, the networks are talking about it, Congress is acting to restrain the NSA........yada yada yada.

Because of Snowden.

It's checkbook journalism at it's finest. Pure punditry, personal attacks, no true civic discussion. We have fools falling for the narrative actually saying Wyden, the guy who actually broke the story, has less integrity than equivocating Snowden.

This is not substantive, we all agree the NSA needs to be checked (I'm on record to abolish it, until terrorism is as dangerous as walking down the street it's not an actual civil issue the government should bother with).

But we are doing nothing to check it. And why? Because we're too distracted "discussing." All the while clicks ramp up on profit ventures designed specifically to make money on outrage.

that classified executive orders could override federal law is a pretty specific concern. Why do you think raising such a concern would have landed him in jail?

If he said "I believe mass data collection by PRISM is illegal," he goes straight to jail, as he was not privy to that information.

It's simple deduction. If he said anything specific he goes to jail. There was nothing specific.

I happen to regard many of merrily's statements highly, including this one:

DU'er "merrily" --
Yes, leaking does lead to making secret govt conduct an issue and yes that is due to actions of the govt.



he was not careful to limit his leaks only to things he thought were wrong.



Greenwald has said otherwise, that Snowden gave them to journalists he believed could, better than he could, evaluate because they have more experience doing that. And Greenwald has described his own process very carefully.

I am not saying Greenwald is correct. I am saying there is more than one version of your claim that Snowden was negligent.

And I have yet to see anything posted here that proves that anyone got information damaging to the US that they did not already have, other than the general populace. Every poster I've asked for a link on the China story--and I have asked three so far--has disappeared from the thread after I made the request.

However, on balance, I would rather have had the disclosures than not, even if some info leaked to nations and groups that have their own intel outfits.

I have no brief for Snowden or Greenwald. I not only do not know what their motives were, I don't care. It's irrelevant to me. I challenge stuff posted here only because I never like propaganda and resist it when I see it. The disclosures and the acts and omissions of my government, acting on my dime, however, are very relevant to me.
####

An individual over at "emptywheel.net" is doing credible (and incedible!) work on the Snowden issue, and that site should be a must read for anyone sorting through the issues:
http://www.emptywheel.net/2014/05/30/snowden-a-classified-executive-order/


http://www.emptywheel.net/2014/05/29/snowdens-emailed-question-addresses-one-abuse-revealed-by-his-leaks/

http://www.emptywheel.net/2014/05/29/nsas-training-programs-are-a-mess/

...who piloted them to the Moon in a U.F.O. captained by Elvis.

For those who think he's simply 'biding his time' (you didn't say that, Vattel), I predict severe disappointment 'whiplash' the longer this goes on.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]The truth doesn’t always set you free.
Sometimes it builds a bigger cage around the one you’re already in.[/center][/font][hr]