We previously discussed how terribly confused Hillary Clinton appeared in discussing National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden. She just could not understand why he would not have trusted the government to deal with any problems or why he would not come back to the United States. Now, Secretary of State John Kerry is offering his own brand of macho advice to the kid: “man up and come back to the United States.” Sure leaders have called for him to be tried as a traitor and either incarcerated for life or executed. Sure, he is not guaranteed to see all of the evidence used against him or even be guaranteed a federal trial as opposed to a military tribunal. However, Kerry appears ready to give him an “attaboy” on his way to solitary confinement under Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) that cut off virtually any contact with the outside world.
As we discussed with Clinton, the ruling class in Washington finds Snowden perfectly incomprehensible. Every aspect of our political system has long been tied down and controlled by the two parties. For such leaders, someone like Snowden is nothing short of an alien visitation — someone who throws away his career and possible freedom for what he claims to be principle. To make matters worse, Snowden is viewed as a whistleblower, if not a hero, by many in the United States and around the world. (However, polls in the U.S. are conflicting. A majority are glad that the disclosures were made but other polls show that a majority believes Snowden should stand trial. Making things even more precarious for people like Clinton is that younger people have particularly rallied to the side of Snowden as a whistleblower). While President Obama implausibly claimed that he would have reviewed these abusive programs without Snowden’s disclosures, Snowden was clearly the cause of multiple investigations and reforms of these programs.
Snowden committed the ultimate crime in Washington: he embarrassed leadership in both parties. He broke the rules and went outside of a carefully controlled duopoly system of control. He embarrassed many, including Clinton, who sat by quietly as the national security system invaded the privacy of every American citizen. Indeed, for people in the establishment who have spent their lives reinforcing that system, someone like Snowden is more than an anomaly. He is someone who not only broke the rules but threw away his career to make these disclosures. For people like Clinton and Kerry, he could just as well be a man from Mars.
Kerry said that Snowden really needs to “stand up in the United States and make his case to the American people.” Indeed, Kerry declared that “A patriot would not run away. … He can come home but he’s a fugitive from justice.” Like Clinton, Kerry cannot imagine why Snowden would not trust the system: “If he cares so much about America and he believes in America, he should trust the American system of justice.”
As someone who has held top clearances since the Reagan administration, I do not support the release of classified information. However, as someone who has litigated national security cases from terrorism to espionage cases, there is every reason for Snowden to be leery of our system as it currently stands in the post 9-11 world. I have great faith and love for our legal system, but national security law has become increasingly draconian and outcome determinative due to various changes in the last decade. This Administration has continued the use of secret legal opinions and secret evidence in cases. The agencies continue to classify information to prevent the public or defendants from reviewing potentially embarrassing or conflicting material. President Obama has refused to close tribunal proceedings and maintains the same claim of his inherent authority to decide whether people go to real courts or the widely ridiculed tribunal proceedings. Even if in the federal system, the government would hit Snowden with SAMs to cut off any contact and impose limitations on even his cleared counsel in speaking with him. At trial, federal judges are increasingly barring arguments from defendants as “immaterial” even when those arguments are the real reason for their actions.
Thus, the Justice Department would likely move to exclude arguments that disclosure was necessary because Snowden had no real alternative for reform. He might be even prevented from arguing that he was seeking to protect citizens from the systemic and comprehensive denial of privacy. Even if some of that motivational argument were allowed, it would likely trigger an instruction that that is no defense to the charges. Sentencing enhancements routinely used by the Justice Department would guarantee a life sentence if convicted for Snowden.
As for utilizing the system to make these disclosures before he fled, Snowden had little reason to trust the congressional oversight committees or the agencies themselves. Just for the record, as many of you know, I represented the prior whistleblower who first revealed this program years before Snowden. He tried to use the system. Happily he was not charged and is doing well. However, as I have testified in Congress, the whistleblower system referred to by Clinton is a colossal joke. First, there are exceptions under the whistleblower laws for national security information. Second, the House and Senate oversight committees are viewed as the place that whistleblowers go to get arrested. There is a revolving door of staff back and forth to the intelligence agencies and people like Dianne Feinstein have denounced Snowden as a traitor. While one can still criticize Snowden for breaking classification laws, the suggestion that he could have used the whistleblower system is hardly self-evident if you are familiar with the laws or the history of such cases.
Whatever Snowden decides, it is clear that if he returns he will be quickly put in isolation and would be virtually certain of conviction with a life sentence. That is assuming that some leaders do not get their way in calling for a death penalty case. That is certain a lot to “man up” to.
feynman
No offense personally taken.
Al Z
Kerry will be testifying before either Issa or the Select Committee – as soon as the Republicans can decide who is in charge of the investigation. and Issa quits throwing hissy fits. Issa is plenty annoyed that Boehner did not let Issa run the Select committee. Lotsa drama. Stay tuned.
Paul C. Schulte
Do you think Mr. Kerry would tell the young boy to “Man up”?
In a late evening news blog I see that Rep. Issa is not demanding that Kerry come to his Committee Hearing. Kerry refuses to Man Up. This whole thing with Kerry and the Man Up demand made me reconsider any respect for Kerry at all. He is a disgrace to the human race.
Al – it has taken you this long to figure that out about Kerry?
Nick,
Nothing prevents you from despising Sec.Kerry. However, when asserting that he was despised by all his colleagues AND has no real friends, a description of such certainty that it seems to promise some extended opportunity of close observation, I would think a man of integrity would provide some corroboration
Not Snowden but *Keith Alexander*: Hero or Traitor (the debate we should be having)
http://www.juancole.com/2014/05/snowden-alexander-traitor.html
Paul C. Schulte
The thought of ANY Easter Bunny spying on us is creepy enough.
Since the NSA man’d-up and produced an e-mail they said didn’t exist in the first place… Does one believe that this is all there is? I wonder what they destroyed in the process…
https://twitter.com/trevortimm/statuses/472442565753466880
Max-1 – anyone who believe NSA believes in the Easter bunny.
Kerry was despised in the Senate by Rep and Dems. He has hardly any real friends, just political “friends.” People who know him know he’s an empty suit phony.
LaserDLiquidator
p.s.
When Snowden first was revealed I called it then…
… They’re treating whistleblowers like some boy who dared cry out:
“THE KING HAS NO CLOTHES!”
LaserDLiquidator
I’m following Dan, not John on the issue. I find the former credible while the latter is no longer the man he used to be… Perhaps Kerry needs to man up, a bit.
https://twitter.com/DanielEllsberg/statuses/472440301655953409
Max-1 – Kerry was never the man he pretended to be.
Emptywheel has a a good observation on the Snowden interview and the NSA’s response…
Snowden: “A Classified Executive Order”
http://www.emptywheel.net/2014/05/30/snowden-a-classified-executive-order/
Let’s let readers decide about Foreign Policy…..From Wiki
“More than 40 years ago, against the backdrop of an America torn apart by Vietnam—Foreign Policy magazine was founded by Harvard professor Samuel Huntington, a one-time hawk, and his close friend, Warren Demian Manshel, a dove. The purpose and mission was to question commonplace views and groupthink and to give a voice to alternative views about American foreign policy. Huntington hoped it would be “serious but not scholarly, lively but not glib.”
In 2000, under the ownership of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, FP transitioned from a slim, quarterly journal to the glossy magazine it is today — while retaining its independent viewpoint and commitment to rigorous exploration of the world’s biggest issues.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Policy_%28magazine%29
_________________________________________________
Besides the Onion and links to Breitbart, Paul. what are your preferred sources?
That is very well said. Those words may hang around for a while. I don’t think the citizens of this country are prepared for the hard decisions that await them.
But that’s why we have the Republican Party; to tell us what to believe and who to vote for; Right?
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 12:28 PM, JONATHAN TURLEY wrote:
> slohrss29 commented: “That is very well said. Those words may hang > around for a while. I don’t think the citizens of this country are prepared > for the hard decisions that await them.” >
If someone else has already posted here on the blog this quote from Snowden, then I apologize. But this is a good thing for Kerry to hear at his own trial in Den Haag at the International Court of Justice.
Interview of Snowden on NBC this Wednesday:
Snowden spoke with NBC News’ Brian Williams in an interview recorded in Russia, where Snowden was given asylum in 2013. NBC also reported that Snowden mentioned the Constitution 22 times during the interview.
At one point in the interview, Williams asked Snowden if he considered himself a patriot.
“I think patriot is a word that’s — that’s thrown around so much that it can be devalued nowadays. But being a patriot doesn’t mean prioritizing service to government above all else. Being a patriot means knowing when to protect your country, knowing when to protect your Constitution, knowing when to protect your countrymen from the — the violations of an — and encroachments of adversaries. And those adversaries don’t have to be foreign countries,” Snowden said.
Very well stated Dr. Harris. Forgive me to be so forward in throwing another chicken in the pot to cook. I completely agree that morality is intrinsic to the individual. I would have to say at this point in time that electronic media have replaced our general sense of reality. We all have to admit we are consumed by media messages for almost all of our waking hours. I think it is a fair statement to say that this situation has two general effects; 1) it redefines morality at an individual level nearly constantly; and, 2) if you subscribe to Carl Jung’s collective unconscious, this media bombardment has to be creating new innate morality for each successive generation. I will also stir the pot in grand action by taking a shot at Hollywood. Constantly we see in television and movies that rules and laws ALWAYS fall short, and that instead of following rules, procedures, and laws, it is best to throw those out the window and act on a “situational morality.” Even in this most scary of times, I still see scenes on TV where the actors cut “right to the torture.” Haven’t we had enough of that the last 13 years? From Dirty Harry to now, it is best to act as you see fit, not as how a common ethical standard should be applied. I think this statement applies to just about every blog topic we have had on here, from improper police action to foreign policy that just does not have any cohesion whatsoever. I think Kerry is the perfect example. It’s just all in how HE sees it. Ideals? they are apparently as intrinsic to the individual ethics. Maybe this is the common challenge of our society going forward.
Fine, Nick. You’ve made your choice. We know exactly what you think of this president and what you think of the ‘duopoly’. We know exactly what you think about everything. My comments were not exclusively meant for you. The Foreign Policy article was not exclusively meant for you. I thought it was of interest, it was from a respected source, and maybe some would like to read it.
I know this will come as a shock but Foreign Policy is NOT a respected source.
Yes it seems that a flight suit raises the IQ of any President. Maybe all Presidents start should wearing a uniform.
I’m not interested in a foreign policy in which we wrap ourselves in flags and go marching off to war. singing another stanza of ‘Onward Christian Soldiers”.
I don’t want a foreign policy that is calculated to create a call for “another round” r by the men gathered in front of the TV for Saturday’s game,
“Tepid” thoughtful reviews are just fine. Too bad some just prefer blood and guts.
False choice. I never voted for Bush. I voted for Obama once. My old man taught me to never make the same mistake twice. I am an independent. I think for myself. This is a failed presidency.