Repealing the Patriot Act.

Actually, I've spent the day working on a project, buying groceries, watching one of my grandkids (on Zoom) play in the high school orchestra.

Your answers are "I have no idea why I support Snowden. I just thought it would make me look cool. Or maybe I think he's hot."

Really? Snowden's is that small? Well, to each her own.

I just noticed this in TGOCH post.
"Some of these woke people need to take a nap." James Carville

Political leanings aside, James Carville is awesome! Dude tells it like it is like a fucking BOSS!

I just noticed that Snowden looks a little like Anc! What's up with that?

I noticed that, too! Maybe that's why @Jenee thinks he's All That.

Honestly, despite Daniel Craig being a really good James Bond, I'd say James Bond is potentially a terrible spy by having effectively

Honestly, despite Daniel Craig being a really good James Bond, I'd say James Bond is potentially a terrible spy by having effectively blown his cover time and time again. He is at least better than Sterling Archer, who is also an unrepentent arrogant ass

The logic really doesn't track here.

He was charged with violating the Espionage Act of 1917. That law has not been repealed or overturned. Arguing that a conviction under one law should be thrown out because the acts that led to the conviction partially involved revealing things that happened as a result of a different law that was overturned is ... a stretch.

Snowden should have been pardoned by now. I don’t think he should have been, at the time, but prosecutors should have allowed him to raise a public interest defense before a jury in exchange for surrendering — which is all he asked for. He’s spent years in exile because Eric Holder, Jeff Sessions, and Bill Barr wanted him made an example of, and knew and know that letting him raise a public interest defense would ensure no jury would convict him. It’s been enough.

Back on topic, Justin Amash introduced a bill to end civil asset forfeiture today. I like the guy but shit, too little, too late, dude.

Remember Code Pink or whatever their name was when Bush JR. pushed us into Iraq? They were warning us about the Patriot Act back then and I remember the left getting their panties in wad, then when Obama was elected, all of the sudden everyone got quiet. Then Snowden came out with his stuff and all of the sudden he’s the bad guy? I remember.

You see, some people are capable of this thing called nuance, where (a) the idea that some of the Patriot Act's provisions are bad, and (b) the idea that a completely different law against revealing classified information might exist for a good reason, can be true simultaneously.

And people who robbed or killed while also being charged with laws pertaining to marijuana should also be held accountable for those crimes, but not those specific to marijuana. If the charge of violating the espionage act has sole to do with revealing information gathered through the patriot act, then those charges should be dropped. But, if he actually provided actually military secrets to the enemy, then those charges should stay. The problem is, there’s no way of proving that without also revealing those same secrets in court. So, there’s no way to determine Snowden’s guilt or innocence.

Sounds like you want to take a trip to the....DANGER ZONE!

To what impact are you referring?

In SIGINT and ELINT? LOL. OK, Packard.

We were reading Merkel's emails on a regular basis. That was one of the things the Snowden leak revealed.

US cyber capability was unprecedented for 25 years. Where we fell down was in human intelligence, b/c we relied too much on our shiny toys.

Once that edge went away, US fortunes reversed dramatically. We saw it in the aftermath of Snowden, which was the largest intelligence leak in history, and now we are seeing the aftermath of that, in which direct hacks of the entire US system are happening, and that is in no doubt due to the worst POTUS we ever had - who was put in place with the assistance of Russian hacking.

If you don't understand how these things are related, I doubt it's due to a lack of intelligence. Most probably just willful ignorance.

No. You weren't. The same people that were reading your emails were reading hers, and mine, and Clinton's, and Trump's, and the people reading all of these emails included Putin. That

But it's good to see your arrogance is back. I remember when you were defending the WMD lie and the war on terror in exactly the same way, as well as the reliability of the US military as an ally abroad, and the glory of American democracy at home. In each case, pride makes you unable to see you're defending your enemies against your friends.

Not disagreeing with your general point here, but it's worth noting that even under the Patriot Act, many of the practices exposed by Snowden were and are illegal. They sold out civil liberty with the Patriot Act, and then they still took more.

Putin was reading Clinton's emails? If you are talking about Hillary, yes, we know that - but that happened after Snowden, so it only underscores my point.

If you are talking about Bill, I'm sure you have a citation for that? I'll wait.

Believe it or not, some people in the world have more knowledge than you about some subjects.

And my arrogance never left. It's just that on most issues, you and I agree. I do think you are a very smart guy, but that doesn't mean you have any experience in this field.

I live in Washington DC, I worked in a major communications company with direct ties to intelligence for decades, I have a dozen friends in the alphabet agencies. There are a lot of things in the world that don't make the nightly news, even now. You might be surprised about the things that I was able to access.

And wounded pride seems to be a recurring theme from Europe, lately. But don't worry, thanks to gents like Snowden, you guys will find a resurgent Russia, and the US is likely to go into isolation sooner rather than later. Lots of people are going to find out that while we are arrogant assholes, we aren't monsters like Putin or Xi.

I am surprised by this view. I see no self-agrandizement in Snowden, not even a little bit (very much contrary to Assange). Can you say a bit more on how you think he should have acted differently?

As for the impact, 350 million Americans have enjoyed a bit more privacy, and have been victims of a bit less government crime, through his actions. It could have been a lot more, if they actually cared. Same is true for several hundred millions abroad.

As for the security risks incurred by his leak, I find it very hard to consider that a consequence of his actions as opposed to a consequence of the actions of the criminals he exposed. When a man goes to prison for life for crimes he did commit, that might be very sad for his kids -- but they don't get to blame the witness who incriminated him.

Because you are vastly ignorant on this topic.

No, it also happened before Snowden, and it's part of what he exposed.

Yes. We know. It's you who hasn't thought through the consequences of what you just said.

That the President's personal communications were hacked prior to Snowden? I'm sure you can provide a link for that then. If so, first I'm hearing of it.

As to the 'consequences of what I just said', please let me know how dumping 1.5 million documents including methods make Putin or Xi LESS of a problem.

Do people actually believe that? I am pretty sure you would make a really good kardashian, or perhaps a romulan. However, you might want to rationalize some stuff. Explain your idea of how things really work so we can evaluate your thought processes for ourselves.

If they buy that shit, holy fucking crap are they gullible.

Everybody's personal communication, thus including those of Presidents and future Presidents, which is exactly what you got with Trump. That isn't what you mean though -- I specifically said "in the same way as yours and mine", and you chose to instead talk about secure communications because it gave you a chance to boast instead of address the topic. So you're talking confidential information; but then you rightly go on to describe exactly what happened, namely that humans will let you have any confidential information if you can blackmail them; and exposing all of their private communication will do exactly that, and did do exactly that.

It doesn't. But handing them only to Putin and Xi isn't any better either, and you are endlessly naive if you think that didn't happen.

Let's try this a different way. Is Snowden, in your opinion, a once-in-a-century genius of espionage? In order to expose US secrets to the public, and more of them to Putin and perhaps Xi, did he accomplish some incredible unforeseeable feat that no one could reasonably have been expected to guard against?

But he knows people in the alphabet things......Oh wait, that means we now know people in the alphabet things so we can all pull shit out of our ass with no rational explanation and say we know people in DC. That makes us dayton right, and you cannot fuck with dayton right.

Of course some people might want to explain their reasoning and train of thought and perhaps others might be enlightened and see their point if explained well, but who would do that when you can just win by saying you live in DC and know people in alphabet things.

I know I am convinced.

You said Putin had access to everyone's communications, including Clinton and Trump. Again, if that's Hillary, yes, thanks for stating the obvious, and that underscores my point. If not, President's communications are encrypted, and are monitored for breaches constantly, and that's not the same as 'yours and mine.'

As to bragging, don't be ridiculous. You decided to spike on me, despite having no idea what I do for a living. Remember the bolded words to emphasis how wrong I was! I'm not even particularly well connected, but there's tons of information systems out there, and yes, I was involved with running some of them with this kind of data. There's hundreds of thousands of people involved in telecommunications. This doesn't make me special, but the odds of you throwing a stick and hitting someone in the DC area that has access to specialized information is pretty damn good.

Don't you have that reversed? You need the confidential information to blackmail them in the first place. But yes, once you have leverage you can expect more. Was Merkel blackmailed?

I do think that happened - hence my belief that Snowden deserves extended jail time, because he was the one who did it. I believe we don't get a Trump presidency and all the evils that go along with that. We might not have gotten Brexit either. It's virtually certain that FSB's capabilities took a quantum leap forward. Prior to Snowden, they were known mostly for denial of service attacks, something any script kiddie could accomplish. I'm sure their capabilities were improving, but they went from an also-ran to the single biggest espionage event in world history, and that impacts the fate of nations. Millions of lives will be different because Snowden was idealistic and stupid, and yes, he should be punished for that.

You really need to work on your socratic method.

Let's try this a different way.

Bob drinks a fifth of vodka and goes out and murders your family in a car wreck. Was that some incredible unforeseeable feat that no one could have reasonably expected to guard against?

If the US didn't get there first, these abilities would still exist. You are incredibly naive if you don't understand that.

You're almost there! Keep going.

The bolded words were to point out that you, personally, this individual person, did not read Presidents' or Chancellors' encrypted emails. If I am wrong about that -- who knows -- then I do get that you feel personally betrayed by Snowden. But the rest of the US shouldn't.

No, you don't, and that's the whole point. Again, keep going.

I don't know. Schröder almost certainly was.

Do you think he was the only one who did it? Your counter-example suggests that you think it was as common as drunk driving.

OK, Packard. I'm tired of this. You have a point, make it.

Right, silly. We meant the US. I also use we when I talk about Virginians or people who root for certain sports teams. This is common parlance in the US.

As to personal betrayal, I have no personal stake in it. But I think it's extremely likely that his actions led to massive unintended consequences, and some of those included the rise of fascism in my country, the destruction of environmental protections that are vital, and inhumane practices such as child separation and forcible sterilization of immigrants. So I certainly want him held accountable for what he personally did, yes. And that was an enormous breech of the espionage act.

How do you blackmail someone without confidential information? Hey, give me rep or I'll tell everyone you are German!

'the action, treated as a criminal offense, of demanding payment or another benefit from someone in return for not revealing compromising or damaging information about them.'

I think at this point you are just committed to arguing.

Maybe, maybe not. If so, it hasn't positively come to light, it's only speculation.

His was the largest breach in history that is known, and the reaction to the people in the community shows they believe he did something unusual. His act was far, far more damaging than Chelsea Manning, who did 7 years but then had her sentence commuted by Obama.

My countervailing example was to show that it's personal responsibility for your actions that is the basis of these laws. Snowden knew what he was doing was wrong. You could argue mitigation if you could prove that he didn't intend for Putin to get his hands on the data, but he makes the point moot by becoming a permanent resident in Russia.