So, what dirt does Snowden still have?

[BobStackFan4Life]

Had he outlined the problems in the US and not gone on his odyssey, he wouldn't have needed insurance.

Look at how NSA whistleblower Thomas Drake was treated.

I differed as a whistleblower to Snowden only in this respect: in accordance with the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act, I took my concerns up within the chain of command, to the very highest levels at the NSA, and then to Congress and the Department of Defense. I understand why Snowden has taken his course of action, because he's been following this for years: he's seen what's happened to other whistleblowers like me.

By following protocol, you get flagged – just for raising issues. You're identified as someone they don't like, someone not to be trusted. I was exposed early on because I was a material witness for two 9/11 congressional investigations. In closed testimony, I told them everything I knew – about Stellar Wind, billions of dollars in fraud, waste and abuse, and the critical intelligence, which the NSA had but did not disclose to other agencies, preventing vital action against known threats. If that intelligence had been shared, it may very well have prevented 9/11.

But as I found out later, none of the material evidence I disclosed went into the official record. It became a state secret even to give information of this kind to the 9/11 investigation.

I reached a point in early 2006 when I decided I would contact a reporter. I had the same level of security clearance as Snowden. If you look at the indictment from 2010, you can see that I was accused of causing "exceptionally grave damage to US national security". Despite allegations that I had tippy-top-secret documents, In fact, I had no classified information in my possession, and I disclosed none to the Baltimore Sun journalist during 2006 and 2007. But I got hammered: in November 2007, I was raided by a dozen armed FBI agents, when I was served with a search warrant. The nightmare had only just begun, including extensive physical and electronic surveillance.

In April 2008, in a secret meeting with the FBI, the chief prosecutor from the Department of Justice assigned to lead the prosecution said, "How would you like to spend the rest of your life in jail, Mr Drake?" – unless I co-operated with their multi-year, multimillion-dollar criminal leak investigation, launched in 2005 after the explosive New York Times article revealing for the first time the warrantless wiretapping operation. Two years later, they finally charged me with a ten felony count indictment, including five counts under the Espionage Act. I faced upwards of 35 years in prison.

In July 2011, after the government's case had collapsed under the weight of truth, I plead to a minor misdemeanor for "exceeding authorized use of a computer" under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act – in exchange for the DOJ dropping all ten felony counts. I received as a sentence one year's probation and 240 hours of community service: I interviewed almost 50 veterans for the Library of Congress veterans history project. This was a rare, almost unprecedented, case of a government prosecution of a whistleblower ending in total defeat and failure.

So, the stakes for whistleblowers are incredibly high. The government has got its knives out: there's a massive manhunt for Snowden. They will use all their resources to hunt him down and every detail of his life will be turned inside out. They'll do everything they can to "bring him to justice" – already there are calls for the "traitor" to be "put away for life".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/12/snowden-surveillance-subverting-constitution?INTCMP=SRCH

There are only so many places to get the intel. If it goes public, the origins of them are not that difficult for the insiders to figure out.

Not sure what you're saying- are you trying to claim lives have already been put at risk? If so, I think that's nonsense. Not even political careers have been put at risk unfortunately. Clapper was shown to have lied under oath and Obama and the supporters of these programs still express confidence in him. So much for "oversight" when you allow your Director of National Intelligence to get away with lying to Congress and the American people at a public hearing- and there are no consequences.

If you don't think he's had to give intel to China and Russia, you are being incredibly naive. They would not put their asses on the line and not get anything.

He says he hasn't. Until I see some convincing evidence to the contrary I think I'll believe him. But seeing as you're convinced he's "scum" I can see why you would not. Frankly, I think you're the one that's being gullible, for so easily falling for the MSNBC demonization campaign against Snowden. All it took is a change in administration for you to start sounding like Cheney. This article by former MSNBC employee Jeff Cohen is telling.

But with Obama in power, a number of MSNBC talking heads have reacted to the Snowden disclosures like Fox News hosts did when they were in hysterical damage control mode for Bush - complete with ridiculously fact-free claims and national chauvinism that we've long come to expect from the "fair & balanced" channel.

As Snowden arrived in Russia from Hong Kong, MSNBC host Ed Schultz blustered on about Snowden as a "punk" and "coward." Railing about the "security of the country" in tones Hannity would approve of, Schultz questioned Snowden's patriotism and credibility, asking: "If the United States of America is doing something so egregiously wrong in its surveillance program, how come he's the only one speaking up?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-cohen/how-do-you-know-when-pres_b_3558857.html

The story has been about Snowden and not the problems ever since he went to Hong Kong and then to Russia. He's also made the story about himself in working with Wikileaks and with the countries that he has been in contact with for asylum.

There's no rule that says the media has to focus on Snowden to the detriment of the documents because he left the country. They're free to focus on whatever they want. They CHOOSE to focus on Snowden. Snowden has not made the story about himself- the media has. If Snowden wanted to make the story about himself why has he not been speaking to 60 Minutes, etc. Every news outlet has been trying to get an interview with him. He could've given hundreds of interviews by now.

He planned this entire fiasco from before got his job.

You're referring to him taking the job with Booz Allen several months ago. He'd been working at the NSA since 2009 and had already decided serious wrongdoing was taking place. So yeah, what if he did take the job to get the documents which would prove serious wrongdoing was taking place. He did what he felt he had to do to expose the wrongdoing.

If it was about fixing a problem, he had a story that the world would have loved and protected him.

Nonsense. You probably haven't been paying attention but the Obama administration has been waging a war on whistleblowers.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/06/obamas-whistleblowers-stuxnet-leaks-drones

He's acting like a vigilante and a traitor. his "insurance" prove it.

I disagree.

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

The odds we have a massive document dump prepared to counteract his little shell game are also high.

I'm not following. Who will dump the documents and how will dumping them counter "his little shell game"? And what do you mean by "his little shell game"?

 

[ONW]

I'm not following. Who will dump the documents and how will dumping them counter "his little shell game"? And what do you mean by "his little shell game"?

The CIA/NSA/Etc. knows everything this guy has ever claimed to or actually downloaded and possesses. They can spin just about anything he could possibly produce as the creations of a lying/thieving/un-American traitor.

 

[PhDeac]

They can spin it but will we believe it?

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

The CIA/NSA/Etc. knows everything this guy has ever claimed to or actually downloaded and possesses. They can spin just about anything he could possibly produce as the creations of a lying/thieving/un-American traitor.

I don't think they know all that he possesses and I've read news reports that quote intelligence analysts saying as much. They might know- but I won't be surprised if they don't. Anyway, they've been working overtime trying to spin what's been released so far as the machinations of a lying/thieving/un-American traitor and it doesn't seem to have worked that well. It's worked to an extent- 34% of Americans feel he's a traitor, but 55% still view him as a whistleblower. And that's after a month or so of an extensive smear campaign.

 

[RJKarl]

It has nothing to do with MSNBC or anyone else's line.

It's hopelessly naive to think the Chinese or the Russians would risk international condemnation and get nothing out of it. He swore an oath not do what he did knowing that he was planning on breaking the law. He beat lie detector tests and a background checks. There's no reason to believe anything he says.

If he came out to a major paper with good data, he would have been untouchable. Nothing ever happened to Ellsburg. If you think Obama is as bad as Nixon with Hoover, you have bought into Faux News lock, stock and barrel.

Snowden told the world that he and over a million others have access to all our station locations and station chiefs. This alone put thousands of lives at risk.

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

There's no reason to believe anything he says.

Except that he has the NSA documents to prove what he's saying.

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

Snowden told the world that he and over a million others have access to all our station locations and station chiefs. This alone put thousands of lives at risk.

Can you provide a link to what you're trying to say?

 

[FuckmouthedRube]

I don't know if it's all true, I was just speculating based on what I've read. You'd have to ask Snowden. But if he's killed or arrested I think the odds of a massive document dump are high.

I'm with you if he's killed, but not if he's arrested. That would be evidence that could be used against him at a trial. China, Russia, and WikiLeaks aren't America's friends. Would not surprise me at all if all three parties now have stolen information which is damaging/embarrassing to America. Maybe WikiLeaks cares about Snowden, but China (who didn't want him after they got what they wanted from Snowden) and Russia don't give a shit about Snowden. They can release information which damages America whenever they want, irrespective of Snowden's wishes.

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

If he came out to a major paper with good data, he would have been untouchable. Nothing ever happened to Ellsburg. If you think Obama is as bad as Nixon with Hoover, you have bought into Faux News lock, stock and barrel.

I think you should read up on Daniel Ellsberg and the lengths the Nixon Administration went to to get him. Also, Ellsberg himself disagrees with you and feels Snowden did the right thing by fleeing the United States.

Many people compare Edward Snowden to me unfavorably for leaving the country and seeking asylum, rather than facing trial as I did. I don’t agree. The country I stayed in was a different America, a long time ago.

I hope Snowden’s revelations will spark a movement to rescue our democracy, but he could not be part of that movement had he stayed here. There is zero chance that he would be allowed out on bail if he returned now and close to no chance that, had he not left the country, he would have been granted bail. Instead, he would be in a prison cell like Bradley Manning, incommunicado.

He would almost certainly be confined in total isolation, even longer than the more than eight months Manning suffered during his three years of imprisonment before his trial began recently. The United Nations Special Rapporteur for Torture described Manning’s conditions as “cruel, inhuman and degrading.” (That realistic prospect, by itself, is grounds for most countries granting Snowden asylum, if they could withstand bullying and bribery from the United States.)

But Snowden’s contribution to the noble cause of restoring the First, Fourth and Fifth amendments to the Constitution is in his documents. It depends in no way on his reputation or estimates of his character or motives — still less, on his presence in a courtroom arguing the current charges, or his living the rest of his life in prison. Nothing worthwhile would be served, in my opinion, by Snowden voluntarily surrendering to U.S. authorities given the current state of the law.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-07-07/opinions/40427629_1_daniel-ellsberg-pentagon-papers-snowden-s
I don't know if Obama is as bad Nixon with Hoover- but I know when it comes to his unwavering support of the surveillance state and things like torture, rendering, kidnapping, imprisoning without charges, droning, cozying up to the worst of the worst in terms of dictators and murderers, and targeting his own citizens for assassination- he's pretty bad. I barely recognize this country. And all the head in the sand apologists for all this criminality simply because Obama's a Democrat are the true traitors. I think back to when Clapper's lie to Congress was pointed out on here- you immediately tried to downplay it by pointing out a baseball player had lied. As if that's comparable to the Director of National Intelligence lying to Congress and the American people under oath- about something far more important than steroids.

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

I'm with you if he's killed, but not if he's arrested. That would be evidence that could be used against him at a trial. China, Russia, and WikiLeaks aren't America's friends. Would not surprise me at all if all three parties now have stolen information which is damaging/embarrassing to America. Maybe WikiLeaks cares about Snowden, but China (who didn't want him after they got what they wanted from Snowden) and Russia don't give a shit about Snowden. They can release information which damages America whenever they want, irrespective of Snowden's wishes.

I think his assumption, and the assumption of anyone he might've entrusted those documents to, is that if he's arrested he's fucked. He won't get a fair trial no matter what. So release the documents. Then again, I guess if he's arrested the documents could be used as a bargaining chip.

 

[RJKarl]

I think you should read up on Daniel Ellsberg and the lengths the Nixon Administration went to to get him. Also, Ellsberg himself disagrees with you and feels Snowden did the right thing by fleeing the United States.



http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-07-07/opinions/40427629_1_daniel-ellsberg-pentagon-papers-snowden-s
I don't know if Obama is as bad Nixon with Hoover- but I know when it comes to his unwavering support of the surveillance state and things like torture, rendering, kidnapping, imprisoning without charges, droning, cozying up to the worst of the worst in terms of dictators and murderers, and targeting his own citizens for assassination- he's pretty bad. I barely recognize this country. And all the head in the sand apologists for all this criminality simply because Obama's a Democrat are the true traitors. I think back to when Clapper's lie to Congress was pointed out on here- you immediately tried to downplay it by pointing out a baseball player had lied. As if that's comparable to the Director of National Intelligence lying to Congress and the American people under oath- about something far more important than steroids.

WOW are you buying the extremists nonsense hook, line and sinker. He's not rendering, using torture, imprisoning without charges(he tried shut GITMO, but Congress wouldn't let him).

I do support the use of drones and did under W.

As to calling me a traitor, go fuck yourself.

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

WOW are you buying the extremists nonsense hook, line and sinker. He's not rendering, using torture, imprisoning without charges(he tried shut GITMO, but Congress wouldn't let him).

I do support the use of drones and did under W.

As to calling me a traitor, go fuck yourself.

Here's a Washington Post article titled: "Renditions continue under Obama, despite due-process concerns"
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-01-01/world/36323571_1_obama-administration-interrogation-drone-strikes
Another article titled "Torture Under Obama".
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/torture-under-obama
In regards to Bradley Manning, "Bradley Manning's treatment was cruel and inhuman, UN torture chief rules"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/12/bradley-manning-cruel-inhuman-treatment-un
As far as Obama opposing imprisoning people without charges:
"How Obama Came to Be the Biggest Defender of Indefinite Detention"
http://reason.com/archives/2012/09/21/were-all-in-detention-now

 

[RJKarl]

They don't how say many or whom. You want to see the worst.

I have opposed the treatment of Bradley Manning. To extrapolate one case to being policy is ludicrous.

Manning gave out locations and names of US troops. He intentionally put their lives at risk. I can't see how you can defend him.

You are defending a person who intentionally put American lives at risk. He had plenty of information without giving Assange those details.

The article form Reason is ludicrous.

 

[BobStackFan4Life]

You want to see the worst.

No. I refuse to bury my head in the sand and be an apologist for what I consider to be wrongs. I voted for a president, not some divinely ordained king who is beyond criticism. Anyway, it's pointless to continue this discussion.

 

[ONW]

I don't think they know all that he possesses and I've read news reports that quote intelligence analysts saying as much. They might know- but I won't be surprised if they don't. Anyway, they've been working overtime trying to spin what's been released so far as the machinations of a lying/thieving/un-American traitor and it doesn't seem to have worked that well. It's worked to an extent- 34% of Americans feel he's a traitor, but 55% still view him as a whistleblower. And that's after a month or so of an extensive smear campaign.

You can't put a picture on Facebook and then delete it without a digital trail, and you think anything he downloaded isn't? In fact, it's the exact purpose of the program he's trying to "expose."

So you are firmly in the patriot/whistleblower camp?

 

[P4nthers11]

I don't see any tension between believing he is a patriot and also believing he is a self-interested individual who would like to not live out the rest of his days alone and in the dark.

 

[Wrangor]

I don't see any tension between believing he is a patriot and also believing he is a self-interested individual who would like to not live out the rest of his days alone and in the dark.

This is me. Just because he doesn't want to die as a martyr does not mean he is actively pursuing the death of US agents abroad or looking to cripple out infrastructure. The guy exposed some pretty horrific stuff in my opinion and doesn't want that same government to bend/ break the rules on his head.

At this point I am still convinced he is a patriot. But a patriot that doesn't care to voluntarily walk to the gallows.

 

[Lectro]

This is me. Just because he doesn't want to die as a martyr does not mean he is actively pursuing the death of US agents abroad or looking to cripple out infrastructure. The guy exposed some pretty horrific stuff in my opinion and doesn't want that same government to bend/ break the rules on his head.

At this point I am still convinced he is a patriot. But a patriot that doesn't care to voluntarily walk to the gallows.

Agreed. Anybody who takes the time to find out what happens to modern day whistle blowers gets the picture. Going up the chain of command is how you get blacklisted and eventually 'pink slipped' as your career is effectively over and your information is buried.

He is using the chips he has against an overwhelming force (US GOVT)

 

[FuckmouthedRube]

The best comment I've seen on the case is: governments are allowed to have secrets, but they aren't allowed to have secret laws. I'm glad that Snowden exposed PRISM, but I also think that security clearances are a reasonable extension of militaries and intelligence agencies. I'm one of the few who believes Snowden is neither a traitor nor a patriot. Also think Snowden's been used by Russia, China, WikiLeaks, and Greenwald, none of who have Snowden's best interests at heart.