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.
And according to the poll, the most important issues were not military, but financial – which candidate would help them the most via taxes and pay.
Annie:
Incorrect. Despite a couple of people cheering a TV, military favored Romney over Obama 2:1.
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/article/20121007/NEWS/210070309/Military-Times-Poll-Romney-bests-Obama-2-1
Denial is so sad. Marine Times or Military Times, they both have the poll. I have $500 that says it’s so. Care to bet?
feynman:
Believe it or not, the military is a career in times of peace and in times of war. In peacetime, the military (is supposed to) stay in fighting trim. In war, there is an uptick in enlistment, but many do not stay for careers. Upon graduation, West Point cadets are commissioned as 2nd lieutenants in the Army.
The decisions of the Commander in Chief literally affect the lives of these cadets once they graduate to COs. Here is a link that shows President Obama’s recent speech, which focuses on his agenda, his plan, him. And it shows Bush’s last speech in 2008, which focused on the great pride he had in them. It was all about them, their accomplishments, their worth.
Basically, Obama bombed in front of future leaders of the Army he commands. The majority of our military do not respect their CIC, despite all the “career opportunities” he provided them via Libya and staying in 2 wars loooooooooooong after he pledged to end them. But it’s hard to respect someone who sent a team of lawyers along with the force to get Bin Laden.
http://www.ijreview.com/2014/05/142440-watch-vastly-different-west-point-cadets-react-hearing-presidents-obama-bush/
Link, or it’s just hot air, whoosh.
Marine Times survey reported on 3/26/12 Obama’s approval rating @ 25% amongst Marines. That is no surprise to ANYONE here but one person who bases her opinion on her daughter and a few cheers. I don’t do links, but I gave you the cite just like I did the 5/30/11 Gallup 37% for ALL military. He’s headed for single digits soon. Denial is sad to witness. Maybe someone who cares can intervene. Because the hole you’re digging is a mile deep.
Now we know why the Founders precluded eligibility of the son of a foreign citizen – to preclude foreign allegiances, the inverse of which is to believe in American exceptionalism. You don’t swish in front of your meat eaters.
Perhaps that someone should do more reading, so as to provide links to unsubstantiated assertions.
Someone watches too much trashy TV.
“JERRY JERRY JERRY JERRY!”
And what two liberals are disagreeing here? I agree with Feynman 100%. “Enlisted” means NON officers Spinelli. Perhaps that wasn’t clear to you.
I’m not defending Obama for the mistakes he makes, but the fact is that enlisted minorities will not turn on him and will continue to vote Democratic.
Annie,
They cheered the HOPE and sought some CHANGE…
… Instead we got even more of the same.
Seems we have a difference of opinion between 2 hardcore liberals. Debate, and we commenters will judge the winner.
The enlisted military members most certainly do like President Obama. In the ranks there are many Hispanic and Black. Anyone who thinks these minority groups vote Republican, think again. My daughter was in Afghanistan during the 2012 election, those watching news coverage cheered when Obama won again.
How do West Pointers gain employment?
Through war. They don’t much care for a president who is not ready to march into Iran, or Syria, or Ukraine.
How do West Pointers gain promotions?
Through war They don’t much care for a president who is not ready to march into Iran, or Syria, or Ukraine.
How do West Pointers become generals?
Through war They don’t much care for a president who is not ready to march into Iran, or Syria, or Ukraine.
You want cheers at West Point? Give a speech that would make Dick Cheney proud. The cheers will be deafening.
So the Commander-In-Chief admonished America at West Point today, that it shall not flout the law and was rebuked with “polite” applause?
Karen, I’m no fan of former mayor Bloomberg, but he spoke @ the Harvard commencement and said universities are intolerant and guilty of McCarthyism by not allowing any dissenting ideas or speech. Reportedly he was cheered and got a standing ovation from some. The complete opposite that Obama got @ West Point, only sparse, polite applause. The NYT and WashPo panned the West Point speech. The wheels on the bus are coming off quickly. Someone here was trying to sell Obama is loved by the military. I sometimes wonder if people who say obviously falsities like that think they’re fooling anyone?
Following through on what Max-1 said above. Snowden did not send the Atom Bomb secrets to the Soviet Union like the Rosenbergs. It is more like telling his real countrymen and women that the Redcoats are coming. The Redcoats are coming when they spy on your emails. The evil astardBays in our government are worse than the British in 1776 and worse than the Soviets in 1954. Kerry needs to resign and go back to his rich wife. Obama needs to be impeached. I hope that Germany will take Snowden in. Merkel owes it to him. Snowden turned this stuff over to Greenwald. It is Greenwald who is deciding what to now release. The names of those who were spied on will be released. Or some names. Greenwald should promote his book tho from a more secure footing. Keep your powder dry. We may need a well regulated militia to fight these liberty thieves like Kerry and Obama.
HILLARY CLINTON HAD A SECRET MEETING WITH OBAMA IN THE WHITE HOUSE???
Is that true???
Oh, Hillary! We’re SAVED! The enabler-in-chief who made money in futures while making cookies in the kitchen, who wouldn’t divorce her “meal ticket,” who conducted a vicious “war on women” that had affairs with, and at the behest of, her husband, had a meeting with an ineligible president who hasn’t learned he is not a monarch???
What goes around, comes around – from Nixon to Hillary.
May you live in interesting times.