Slashdot Mirror


Eric Holder Says Snowden Performed 'Public Service' (cnn.com)

An anonymous reader writes from a report via CNN: Former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder says Edward Snowden performed a "public service" by triggering a debate over surveillance techniques, but still must pay a penalty for illegally leaking a trove of classified intelligence documents. "We can certainly argue about the way in which Snowden did what he did, but I think that he actually performed a public service by raising the debate that we engaged in and by the changes that we made," Holder told David Axelrod on "The Axe Files," a podcast produced by CNN and the University of Chicago Institute of Politics. "Now I would say that doing what he did -- and the way he did it -- was inappropriate and illegal," Holder added. "I think that he's got to make a decision. He's broken the law in my view. He needs to get lawyers, come on back, and decide, see what he wants to do: Go to trial, try to cut a deal. I think there has to be a consequence for what he has done." "But," Holder emphasized, "I think in deciding what an appropriate sentence should be, I think a judge could take into account the usefulness of having had that national debate." You can listen to the podcast with Eric Holder here.

6 of 168 comments (clear)

  1. This is just so much crap. by wickerprints · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sorry, but "elevating the debate?" NOTHING has changed. The NSA is still illegally conducting mass surveillance on innocent American citizens. There has been ZERO accountability for the NSA and CIA's blatant and PROVEN lies to Congress under oath. There has been no systemic reform nor even the slightest attempt to adhere to Constitutional principles.

    And all this while the US government is still seeking to blame Snowden for endangering national security, haul him back to the US and put him on trial? Should we feel comforted by the statements of a FORMER US Attorney General who has no actual power, just because he says that a judge would consider the ends of Snowden's actions when punishing him for the means by which those ends were achieved--mind you, never once actually admitting that such disclosures would NEVER have come to light by any other way? So we are now to believe Eric Holder's facetious claims of leniency, when NOT ONCE has he said anything to the effect of needing to investigate the NSA for breaking the law and for lying to Congress?

    Fuck you and the high horse you rode in on. This is why we can't trust the government. This is why nobody with a brain believes you for a second, because we KNOW what happened in the past and we are not so stupid as to forget actual concrete outcomes. The harassment of past NSA whistleblowers, ruining their ability to work in anything but the most menial jobs for having dared to expose the corruption of those higher up; the incarceration and inhumane treatment of Chelsea Manning for her involvement in Wikileaks' exposing the indiscriminate behavior of the American military; and the complete arrogance of the FBI in attempting to force Apple to write source code to circumvent iOS encryption that would allow them to access all data on any iPhone--these are just a FEW of the demonstrably true actions on the part of the government that show that they cannot be trusted and are hopelessly corrupt in their thirst for power.

    Snowden was correct to expose the NSA. However, he was wrong to believe that his actions could have possibly shamed the US government and it citizens into holding it accountable.

    1. Re:This is just so much crap. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      NOTHING has changed. The NSA is still illegally conducting mass surveillance on innocent American citizens.

      One thing changed: prior to 2013 saying such things got you labeled a tinfoil hat wearing paranoid geek. After 2013 it is mainstream-accepted fact. Now anyone who says it's not happening, is the weirdo.

      You're just a tinfoil hat wearing paranoid geek for caring. (But that's always been the case: it's never been cool to care about anything.)

      However, he was wrong to believe that his actions could have possibly shamed the US government and it citizens into holding it accountable.

      And now we're confronted with that mainstream-accepted fact too. Prior to 2013, part of the reason that some people thought it wasn't happening was "They wouldn't do that, because eventually they'd get caught and then there would be hell to pay." They got caught, and there wasn't hell to pay. So now we know that nobody cares.

      We didn't know that, or at least I didn't. In early 2013 did you honestly think that the government getting caught would have no consequences? Are you sure your expectations and attitude have not been adjusted by what Snowden did?

  2. Re: talk is cheap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fuck Holder. If him and his stupid cronies didn't retaliate against whistle blowers Snowden might not have had to do what he did.

  3. Conveniently dodging the main issue by mariox19 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's wrong to presume that there was a legal way for Snowden to do what he did, because several previous whistle blowers who went by the book were targeted and prosecuted by the government. The intelligence agencies, and the politicians who support them, do not tolerate leaks—even well-intentioned ones that follow protocol and seek only to expose wrongdoing to the "proper" authorities.

    Let's not talk about Edward Snowden being brought to trial. Rather, the people in our intelligence agencies and their allies in elected offices who subvert our laws, or who downright break our laws, and who vindictively attack anyone who tries to expose their unlawful, un-democratic, and anti-social behavior are the ones who need to be brought to trial. Hold them accountable first—and then we can talk about Edward Snowden.

    --

    quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.

    1. Re:Conveniently dodging the main issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Rather, the people in our intelligence agencies and their allies in elected offices who subvert our laws, or who downright break our laws, and who vindictively attack anyone who tries to expose their unlawful, un-democratic, and anti-social behavior are the ones who need to be brought to trial. Hold them accountable first—and then we can talk about Edward Snowden.

      Yep. I came here to post that very same thought, but you did it first, and better. Plus, it'd have languished down at score:0 from an AC.

      It really irks me that we haven't talked about trials for the people who made the Stasi look like rank amateurs, in the process violating one of the highest laws in the land at a scale never befroe seen in history.

      We're ignoring the murder and talking about punishment for the poor sod who jaywalked across the street to report it.

  4. Re:You can't have it both ways, Holder. by swillden · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Had he gone through channels, that public service would never have occurred.

    Exactly, and that's not armchair theorizing. We have several clear examples of people who tried to go through channels and got slapped down hard for it. And by "slapped down" I mean "Home raided by armed agents, arrested, indicted, prosecuted on unsustainable charges and rendered unemployable". Hell, we know that a man whose job it was to work with whistleblowers under the law was forced out for trying to do his job in the face of illegal actions by his superiors.

    What Snowden did was necessary and it was the only way it could be done.

    And, sadly enough, it appears that it was insufficient.

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.