Posted on Sep 13, 2016
Should President Obama pardon Edward Snowden?
32.8K
445
203
14
14
0
Is Snowden a patriot or a traitor? Should President Obama pardon him, as he's asking in this CNN story?
I'll cast the first no vote as soon as I post this question. Just so you know.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/13/technology/edward-snowden-pardon-obama/index.html
I'll cast the first no vote as soon as I post this question. Just so you know.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/09/13/technology/edward-snowden-pardon-obama/index.html
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 52
This is a controversial subject, that I, being in a similar community, don't feel I should vote or directly comment on one way or the other. Now, I do believe in some aspects he was covered under the Whistle Blower act, but even then, there is not much a piece of paper can protect you from when you are going toe to toe with one of the most powerful agencies in the world. With that being said, Snowden went completely the wrong direction with his exposure. There are proper channels to go through when disclosing or uncovering unethical or illegal activity.. He hurt the nation far more than he helped. His goal, in my opinion, was to protect the American people, but in his attempt he ended up compromising national security, the identities of several high level sensitive personnel, amongst many other things.. The damage may never be undone. I feel what best sums it up is this, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
-No vote.
-No vote.
(2)
(0)
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin
There were no good intentions on Snowden's part. He is in fact selfish and your instinct to go with "no" was a good one.
(0)
(0)
SGT Mary G.
I am of a similar opinion, PO2 George Martin. What concerns me most is the way he did what he did. Having been born and raised during the Cold War, and having served during the Cold War, what I consider the most telling is that he sought refuge with "the threat". I have a difficult time imagining that Snowden deciding to seek refuge in Russia was NOT pre-arranged.
What I wonder is 1) was he a dupe of "the threat, or an out and out traitor working on it's behalf", or; 2) was he a naive whistle-blower? If I could only chose one or the other I would have to go with #1 because it has always looked like a set-up, imho. I would need to know a whole lot more information about him and from him to be able to arrive at a different conclusion.
Imagine being on a jury that would have to make a decision about his actions and intent!
What I wonder is 1) was he a dupe of "the threat, or an out and out traitor working on it's behalf", or; 2) was he a naive whistle-blower? If I could only chose one or the other I would have to go with #1 because it has always looked like a set-up, imho. I would need to know a whole lot more information about him and from him to be able to arrive at a different conclusion.
Imagine being on a jury that would have to make a decision about his actions and intent!
(0)
(0)
I voted yes and will make a countervailing argument to the majority of the comments posted so far. As I see it, the problem Snowden, and a number of other high profile whistle blowers have faced, is a complete degradation/disregard/bypassing of the systems Congress put in place to protect them from retaliation by those in power. Under the past few Administrations (Bush through Obama), a whistle-blower is far more likely to be imprisoned for making an abuse claim through the proper channels, as be declared a hero. As an example look up what happened to William Binney from the NSA. When the fox is in charge of the hen house, its time for the hen to leave or be eaten. That said, it's doubtful that the current fox will pardon one of the chickens that got away.
(2)
(0)
SPC Keelan Southerland
SGT Mary G. - I agree with you, but I think I can explain. The Russian Federation was not his first choice. Do you remember he was trying to get to Ecuador first and meet up with Julian Assange. However, it was not safe because the USA had either brokered a deal or had a team in place, my memory is fuzzy on this. Where could a guy go with Intel that would not directly compromise operatives (this part is speculative) in that country, but would have value to safeguard my stay. Additionally, I could leak information to the Nation I was in, after the/my Government safely extracted the people in that country. I can see choosing The Russian Federation as a second option. Having said all of that, I do not agree with everything he did, but I can understand the why.
Your Dad was right about TV.
Your Dad was right about TV.
(1)
(0)
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin
Ok let's set this history straight because it appears you're looking for something to justify Snowden's behavior. The man initially fled China, a country which is known to be a huge threat to the US in cyber. China was unwilling to extradite him initially claiming the US had not a proper extradition request in accordance with Hong Kong law. Knowing this could easily be changed, Snowden considered Ecuador likely because Assange has been successfully using their Embassy in London for asylum (which would prevent them from "linking up"). Plus Ecuador, which has unfortunately taken a sharp turn to the extreme left would love nothing more than to stick it to the US. Ultimately they gave into US pressure. Snowden then went to the Russian Consulate and eventually managed to be covertly take to Russia. Regardless of who he looked at first, he still went to China first (our cyber enemy) and ended up going to Russia (another cyber enemy). That makes him a traitor. Not only did he betray this country and his oath, but he was also wrong.
(0)
(0)
MSgt James Mullis
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin - I have a few additional points. First, Snowden was a contractor working for Booz Allen and was not a direct employee of the Federal Government, this means he signed a contract but did not swear an oath to gain access to the materials he stole and later released to wiki leaks. Second, he made the public aware that the NSA's program to spy on American Nationals (which had been made legal after 911) was much larger in scope than the public (and most of Congress) had been made aware of. Finally, his biggest revelation was that the system which allowed access to NSA gathered information about US Citizens (including members of Congress, Governors, Judges, and members of the Executive Branch) had been made available to private contractors and therefore private companies/corporations who may have used the system for personal/private profits. The fact that Senior Leadership allowed the NSA's system to be placed into private hands is likely a violation of a number of current laws (including the Espionage Act of 1917). Its my belief that Snowdens' making that information public should have been enough to give him whistle blower status. It didn't, but that's not to say it won't happen at some point in the future. Possibly under a different Presidential administration (one that's not so close to the issue). Beyond that, I admit he clearly stole government property and it appears he likely violated the Espionage Act himself. We'll have to wait and see what else comes to light if his case ever makes it to trial. FYI: William Binney was the consultant on the Edward Snowden movie and is my source for much of the above information.
(0)
(0)
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin
1st, Snowden, was initially a government employee for the CIA where he would have taken an oath of office (which I wasn't specifically referring to). Along the way through his NDAs he agreed not to divulge classified information to include during his investigations when they will have one take an oath they are telling the truth. Not to get into a semantics game with you, but oath is defined as a "solemn promise, often invoking a divine witness, regarding one's future action or behavior." This is what he did when he signed the NDAs, so yes, he did break that oath.
2nd, He made the public aware of a surveillance program, not an effort for spying. The information collected involving Americans could not be accessed without a court order. The actions of an American traversing the Internet (a public domain) is no different than an American walking through a public space. There are also a lot of controls on this capability where using it for illegal means by a contractor or unauthorized personnel is deemed illegal. Those instances where illegal use was discovered, have been prosecuted. So no, the system is not placed in the hands of contractors. Snowden have to steal account access to even gather the info (another illegal act by itself, regardless of what he stole on a highly classified system).
3rd, Snowden MIGHT have been granted whistle blower status I will concede, but he did not take that route. Plus he would likely have been proven wrong. The fact still remains he chose to go to our enemies (especially with regards to cyber warfare), by going to China and in turn Russia. The disclosure of information he released, much of which had nothing to do with the surveillance program on American activities was absolutely a traitorous act.
4th, the only way Snowden is getting out of this is through a Presidential Pardon by a President who does not fully understand the scope of cyber (Like Senator Paul, his Father, and a few others). The fact that Binney is helping him means nothing to me. Binney's experience was much different and at least he can say he attempted to use the system (in which he avoided conviction). Snowden blew that chance. Still, even today William Binney claims the revelations disclosed by Snowden did not result in grave damage to the US, he loses credibility. The man was a whistle blower, his issue was investigated, and found baseless. The problem is, he is able to say whatever he wants where the NSA is still trying to keep things classified and cannot disclose all the facts proving him wrong.
Finally, I work in this career field and along side many other cyber operators, intelligence analysts and then some. No one is putting Snowden on any kind a pedestal. Aside from motivating us to work harder to identify future insider threats, all he did was make our jobs harder to protect this country. Snowden is a traitor.
2nd, He made the public aware of a surveillance program, not an effort for spying. The information collected involving Americans could not be accessed without a court order. The actions of an American traversing the Internet (a public domain) is no different than an American walking through a public space. There are also a lot of controls on this capability where using it for illegal means by a contractor or unauthorized personnel is deemed illegal. Those instances where illegal use was discovered, have been prosecuted. So no, the system is not placed in the hands of contractors. Snowden have to steal account access to even gather the info (another illegal act by itself, regardless of what he stole on a highly classified system).
3rd, Snowden MIGHT have been granted whistle blower status I will concede, but he did not take that route. Plus he would likely have been proven wrong. The fact still remains he chose to go to our enemies (especially with regards to cyber warfare), by going to China and in turn Russia. The disclosure of information he released, much of which had nothing to do with the surveillance program on American activities was absolutely a traitorous act.
4th, the only way Snowden is getting out of this is through a Presidential Pardon by a President who does not fully understand the scope of cyber (Like Senator Paul, his Father, and a few others). The fact that Binney is helping him means nothing to me. Binney's experience was much different and at least he can say he attempted to use the system (in which he avoided conviction). Snowden blew that chance. Still, even today William Binney claims the revelations disclosed by Snowden did not result in grave damage to the US, he loses credibility. The man was a whistle blower, his issue was investigated, and found baseless. The problem is, he is able to say whatever he wants where the NSA is still trying to keep things classified and cannot disclose all the facts proving him wrong.
Finally, I work in this career field and along side many other cyber operators, intelligence analysts and then some. No one is putting Snowden on any kind a pedestal. Aside from motivating us to work harder to identify future insider threats, all he did was make our jobs harder to protect this country. Snowden is a traitor.
(1)
(0)
I chose the second option. I prefer answering questions like this simply "No". People look at you to explain, I walk away.
(2)
(0)
I believe you need a third option. Snowden should first stand trial, and then the President should consider the possibility of a pardon.
My understanding is that more information was released than was necessary for Snowden to raise public awareness of questionable government activities. If I were President I might be inclined to pardon the release of information concerning potentially illegal surveillance... however I would not grant any sort of leniency on the rest.
My understanding is that more information was released than was necessary for Snowden to raise public awareness of questionable government activities. If I were President I might be inclined to pardon the release of information concerning potentially illegal surveillance... however I would not grant any sort of leniency on the rest.
(1)
(0)
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin
Your understanding is incorrect. I recommend you read the posted throughout this thread.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin - What did information on US intelligence gathering in foreign nations have to do with potentially illegal spying here in the US.
(0)
(0)
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin
That's a good question. You should ask Snowden who released the details of our intelligence gathering overseas. What did this have to do with the surveillance program? Why did it have to be released?
(0)
(0)
Not no, but HELLS NO. He did what he did for selfish reasons. He wasn't trying to inform folks, you could do that without shoulder surfing folks at their desks, using ill gotten login and passwords to access info you're not cleared to see, or use login and password info that is given to you knowingly by peers to access information you had no access to. If you were serious, you would've stayed in the US and presented your case in court, you would've appealed, and kept appealing to strengthen your case, and make people think. You ran. Now you won't come back unless we cave to your terms? Stay in Russia. One less fool over here.
(1)
(0)
Hard to say. I do know the left was all gaga when Julian Assange (Wikileaks) made public, information embarrassing to politicians that are conservative. When he did it about liberal politicians, particularly Hillary Clinton, the left wanted his head on a plate. I guess it boils down to whose ox is being gored.
My vote is "coin flip," but that's not an option.
My vote is "coin flip," but that's not an option.
(1)
(0)
Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin
I am against Assange's actions either way, no matter which politician is getting exposed. The man belongs in jail. However, Clinton's information was exposed because she failed to protect it properly using government systems and standards. I'm not feeling sorry for her as she too broke the law. As far as I'm concerned put her and Assange in the same jail cell.
(0)
(0)
When recruiting operatives, it's imperative that they feel we can keep their identities secret. Obviously it's going to be more difficult to recruit now.
On a separate note, a similarly disgusting act, although not as injurious to the country was, Carter pardoning the draft dodgers.
On a separate note, a similarly disgusting act, although not as injurious to the country was, Carter pardoning the draft dodgers.
(1)
(0)
**** NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He's a traitor. He deserves to go to prison for a very long time.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next

Snowden
Barack Obama
Espionage
