Slashdot Mirror
Ask Slashdot: What Does Edward Snowden Deserve?
Nerval's Lobster writes "U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder made government whistleblower Edward Snowden a very peculiar offer last week: plead guilty, and the U.S. government would consider how to handle his criminal case. That seems an inverted way of doing things—in the United States, the discussions (if not the trial) usually come before the guilty plea—but Holder's statement hints yet again at the conundrum facing the government when it comes to Snowden, a former subcontractor for the National Security Agency (NSA) who leaked secrets about that group's intelligence operations to a number of newspapers, most notably The Guardian. It's unlikely that the U.S. government would ever consider giving full clemency to Snowden, but now it seems that various officials are willing to offer something other than locking him in a deep, dark cell and throwing away the key. If Snowden ever risked coming back to the United States (or if he was forced to return, thanks to the Russians kicking him out and no other country willing to give him asylum), and you were Holder and Obama, what sort of deal would you try to strike with everybody's favorite secrets-leaker?"
More popular then you think. Mr. Snowden is a whistleblower who pointed out that the NSA was breaking the law.
Full pardon.
I'm no fan of Nancy Pelosi but I believe she was referring to the fact that the House and Senate much each pass their versions of a bill before reconciliation and a final vote. If one body of congress has passed a bill and the other has not, it is true that you won't know what may be in the final bill. She's a life long politician and should've known better than to say something like that. I'm sure to her, the difference between bills and laws is evident but she should've known the general population wouldn't construe it that way.
I believe torture is against international laws that we have agreed to follow, but I haven't seen anyone charged with crimes for black prisons, extraordinary renditions, and torture.
Capricious application of the law is a prime signifier of a corrupt system.
Then the COURTS will look at EVIDENCE and decide if he qualifies for Whistleblower status.
Snowden and others have already talked about this at length.
The law does not allow for him (a contractor) to be a whistleblower.
If Snowden goes before a court, he'll be prosecuted under the Espionage Act,
most of the evidence against him will be classified, and he'll be convicted in a fairly open and shut case.
And the COURTS will tell the Executive to pound sand.
That's a wonderful scenario, but extremely unlikely.
The courts will follow the law, which leaves no room for Snowden to be found innocent.
Right now Snowden is not "wanted" for any listed CRIMES.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-charges-snowden-with-espionage/2013/06/21/507497d8-dab1-11e2-a016-92547bf094cc_story.html
06/21/2013
Snowden was charged with theft, "unauthorized communication of national defense information" and "willful communication of classified communications intelligence information to an unauthorized person," according to the complaint. The last two charges were brought under the 1917 Espionage Act.
Your post needs less CAPS and more facts.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
The government is breaking the law, and continues to act illegally.
A civilian breaks the law (oh how convenient) to expose the illegal activities.
Why is the civilian prosecuted and the original offender let off scott free??
Why again are we also not trying and sentencing the government officials who broke the law in the first place??
You seem to be misunderstanding "Civil Disobedience". Here is a refresher course: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...