Congress, Constitutional Law, Courts, Criminal law, International, Justice, Lawyering, Media, Military, Politics, Society

Kerry To Snowden: “Man Up and Come Back to the United States.”

220px-John_Kerry_official_Secretary_of_State_portrait220px-Landsdowne_HeraklesWe 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.

228px-Picture_of_Edward_SnowdenAs 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.

292 thoughts on “Kerry To Snowden: “Man Up and Come Back to the United States.””

  2. Was it Jimmy Carter” who offered amnesty to draft dodgers in Canada? Every true American must admit that, while some ancillary steps were technically illegal and ill advised, Snowden defended the Constitution for the benefit of Americans. If we can give amnesty to most of Mexico, we can give amnesty to Snowden.

    How about trading Snowden amnesty for favorable polling? We leave it to the voters – this scenario is really sentiment driven, isn’t it? It’s really a victimless crime isn’t it?

    P.S. How about some reciprocal amnesty for that misdirected Marine in prison in Tijuana?

  3. LOL! Just before Wi. is VIRGINIA! Those were the numbers from VIRGINA!!! Deception or lack of reading skills?

  4. Look at how popular the conservative viewpoint is here. The tendency is to drive out dissenting opinion, encircle themselves with like-minded Liberals, and then be completely ignorant of any problems with the program.

    I just found out that the IRS still has not responded to a FOIA requesting email communications from 12 Democratic Senators implicated in the IRS targeting of conservatives. A year. The IRS keeps telling them they’re working on it. Not that there is nothing to send. They claim they need more time to review the information. Review and redact and delete, I suspect! But the mainstream media (MSM) has spent zero seconds on this story. People who restrict themselves to MSM will never learn about many issues that detract from their party.

  6. Karen, There was a famous liberal socialite from Manhattan, I forget who. But, when Nixon was elected in 1968 she said, “I don’t understand, no one I know voted for him.” Some folks live insular lives.

  7. John, No attribution. It’s just a variation on “All hat and no cowboy” that’s been part of the lexicon for awhile.

  8. Annie:

    I do not deny that your daughter was a Liberal in the armed forces, and that she had Liberal friends there. But your anecdote simply stated that some people cheered in front of the TV when Obama won. Did you ask her if she felt like she was in the majority with her fellow soldiers?

    I have a lot of friends and family who have served over the years. And the ones I knew served during 2008 and 2012 told me the military overwhelmingly opposed Obama. That’s anecdotal, but it does coincide with the polls and study I posted.

  9. Annie:

    You reposted a link, the text of which was already posted. Did you notice that in the closing paragraph, it stated that military who oppose and those who support Obama are united in being disappointed that their CIC never wore a uniform?

  10. “All hat and no cow girl.” Damn! Spinelli, I’m gonna use that one too, with the aforementioned attribution, of course.

  11. Well, Annie, I have posted several polls and a Pew Research study contradicting the venerated Times. Data is not scarce, as I have demonstrated.

    And what The Times failed to discover (but I did) was that the “small but energetic” base of Obama supporters gave more money than most other groups, except for Paul. So they gave more money, but are still statistically firmly in the minority.

    And here is a breakdown of military donations:

    http://www.armytimes.com/article/20120209/NEWS/202090331/Ron-Paul-gets-most-military-donations

  12. A person w/ true self esteem and integrity just admits they were wrong. If you remember the wise adage, “Pride comes before the fall” then you won’t shoot yourself in both feet like this. Maybe.

  15. Army photo
    While solid polling data for troops is scarce, most evidence suggests the U.S. military is more conservative than the nation as a whole

    Email Print Share Comment
    Follow @TIME
    Various yardsticks suggest the U.S. military — or at least the officer corps, which accounts for 17% of the 1.4 million–strong active-duty force — leans Republican.

    The nation’s 24 million troops and veterans account for about 10% of the nation’s potential voters, but they’re not the monolithic bloc many believe.

    Outsiders tend to think the U.S. military is made up entirely of blood-and-gut conservatives, à la John Wayne, but there’s little real evidence to back that up. When the Iraq war was launched, the consensus among U.S. military officers interviewed at the time was that 1 in 3 officers opposed it, suggesting they all weren’t gun ho.

    “The officers by and large are more conservative,” says an Army sergeant just back from Afghanistan. “But the enlisted tend to be more liberal.” Of course, with fewer than 1 in 5 of those in uniform an officer, there’s a lot more enlisted voters.

    But the U.S. military plainly tilts toward the GOP. That’s largely because today’s military is an all-volunteer force increasingly drawn from the Sun Belt, where the Pentagon has focused its recruiting efforts since the draft ended 40 years ago. And traits the military prizes — like aggressiveness and respect for authority — tend to be more pronounced in conservatives.

    While the U.S. military assesses its force every which way — here’s the most recent demographic report — it steers clear of asking about troops’ political views. Military leaders have insisted for years that politics has no role in the U.S. military and that the only way to remain trustworthy is to stay resolutely nonpartisan.

    “Former and retired service members, especially generals and admirals, are connected to the military service for life,” Army General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in June. “When the title or uniform is used for partisan purposes, it can erode the trust relationship.”

    Of course, not everyone — particularly those who have retired — agrees with Dempsey. More than 300 retired generals and admirals have endorsed Republican Mitt Romney’s bid for the presidency. They’re slated to take this advertisement in Monday’s Washington Times newspaper boasting of their support. President Obama hasn’t released such a list, although he pocketed the recent endorsement of Colin Powell, a retired Army general and former Secretary of State.

    The independent Military Times newspaper conducted a voluntary survey among its members that shows them supporting Romney over Obama by a margin greater than 2-to-1. But the newspaper’s subscribers are older and more senior in rank than most of those in the military as a whole, and the fact that it’s a self-selected sample can further distort its findings.

    (PHOTOS: Military Photos: A Month Inside the Armed Forces, October)

    Indeed, there has been a conservative drift among U.S. military officers since the draft ended. In a 2009 survey of 4,000 Army officers, Heidi Urben, an active-duty officer and doctoral candidate at Georgetown University, found that from 1976 to 1996, the share of senior military officers identifying itself as Republican jumped from one-third to two-thirds, while those claiming to be moderates fell from 46% to 22%.

    Senior military officers who described themselves as liberal fell from 16% in 1976 to 3% in 1996. Urben found that younger officers leaving the Army were far more likely to identify themselves as Democrats than those opting to stay, which would tend to make the more senior ranks increasingly Republican.

    “Past surveys have shown senior military officers to generally be conservative and identify with the Republican Party, a trend which has solidified with the advent and professionalism of the all-volunteer force,” Urben wrote in her 2010 dissertation. “Meanwhile, recent surveys suggest that the officer corps is more likely to be conservative and Republican than most enlisted soldiers, an important distinction to keep in mind, considering enlisted soldiers outnumber officers by 4 to 1 in the Army.”

    Pew, 2011
    A Pew survey released last year showed post-9/11 veterans’ political leanings are the reverse of the public they’re serving: 36% described themselves as Republicans, and 21% as Democrats; 34% of the public said they were Democrats, and 23% Republican. Six in 10 vets say they’re more patriotic than the average American.

    But there is conflicting evidence. The Center for Responsive Politics reported last month that self-described military personnel had donated $678,611 to Obama, 85% more than the $398,450 the Romney campaign has collected.

    Back to that sergeant who has just returned from Afghanistan. While the troops are split over whom they’re supporting for President, he says, they’re united on one thing: they’re upset that neither their current Commander in Chief, nor his prospective replacement, ever served a day in a U.S. military uniform. “That,” he says with a pained expression on his dogface, “is something they agree on.”

  16. And those polls include both enlisted and COs (refer to polls for breakdown.)

    1. Since a lot of votes got ‘caught’ overseas, I am not sure how they would count that.

  20. Karen, Damn! I was going to take $500 from her!!! Don’t worry, she never would have bet, all hat and no cowgirl.,

Comments are closed.