Trump cynically floats pardoning Snowden, Dems split on considering it

[crimson5pheonix]

Dems Urged to Say, 'Yes, Snowden Should Be Pardoned' After Trump Floats Possibility

The comment from the president prompted fresh praise for the former intelligence contractor who "blew the whistle on illegal government activity kept secret for years."

www.commondreams.org

Trump, in a move clearly designed to muddy the waters, has suggested he might pardon Edward Snowden. A move that could very easily be countered by agreeing with him and pushing for more protections for whistleblowers, not just Snowden.

Of course, anyone involved with infosec are calling for him to be hanged. That these folk are also a lot of public faces for the Democrat machine has made a simple play unnecessarily messy.

 

[Revnak]

Nations are a grift

 

[Silvanus]

Do these two actually have anything to do with the Democratic Party?

 

[Zeke davis]

Do these two actually have anything to do with the Democratic Party?

Admittedly being a part of MSNBC isn't quite the clear cut prrof at least in terms of the actual political group
Susan rice however has plenty to do with it:

 

[Seanchaidh]

It's kind of astonishing that people post their anti-Snowden opinions in public, honestly.

 

[Hades]

So Trump no longer thinks whistle blowers should be shot then?

 

[Worgen]

So Trump no longer thinks whistle blowers should be shot then?

Only ones that haven't directly or indirectly made him look bad.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

"The last time we heard a White House considering a pardon was 2016, "

Didn't Trump pardon a man named D'Souza in 2018?

 

[Kae]

It's kinda hilarious isn't it?

I get that this is more a publicity stunt than anything but considering Trump's attitude towards whistle-blowers one can't help but laugh at the hypocrisy, good for Snowden though he deserves it.

 

[SupahEwok]

"The last time we heard a White House considering a pardon was 2016, "

Didn't Trump pardon a man named D'Souza in 2018?

That was Snowden saying it, I imagine he means a pardon for himself.

 

[Agema]

"The last time we heard a White House considering a pardon was 2016, "

Didn't Trump pardon a man named D'Souza in 2018?

Trump has pardoned people every year of his presidency.

I think pardons should be granted very rarely and with exceptional justification, because they can undermine the justice system. In my opinion pardons are grotesquely overused in the USA: presidents often hand out dozens, even hundreds, per term of office. (Much more if you include commuting sentences).

Trump is no exception for handing out presidential pardons which are in my view nakedly political and/or corrupt. However, in his defence thus far he has used them relatively sparingly and hopefully won't do a last minute splurge like Bill Clinton did.

 

[Agema]

I get that this is more a publicity stunt than anything but considering Trump's attitude towards whistle-blowers one can't help but laugh at the hypocrisy, good for Snowden though he deserves it.

Publicity, sort of. I think it's a way of generating headlines and distracting people from important stuff going on.

There could be a personal motive for it, which is that Trump is vindictive and has a beef with the US intelligence services: pardoning Snowden is slap in their faces.

 

[Kae]

Publicity, sort of. I think it's a way of generating headlines and distracting people from important stuff going on.

There could be a personal motive for it, which is that Trump is vindictive and has a beef with the US intelligence services: pardoning Snowden is slap in their faces.

Hadn't thought about it that way, I guess I don't give the guy enough credit, and to be fair it's pretty dangerous to still be treating him as an incompetent blubbering idiot when in reality he's pretty dangerous, if he's at least one thing is good at getting people to follow him and let's be honest that does require at least some level of intelligence.

So you're right there's probably more to it than that.

 

[CM156]

Even though I think this is a cynical ploy by the president, I would not be opposed to him doing this. In fact, I think it would be a great idea.

I've heard the claim that his leaks endangered US troops, but I've never seen that proven.

 

[Gordon_4]

Trump has pardoned people every year of his presidency.

I think pardons should be granted very rarely and with exceptional justification, because they can undermine the justice system. In my opinion pardons are grotesquely overused in the USA: presidents often hand out dozens, even hundreds, per term of office. (Much more if you include commuting sentences).

Trump is no exception for handing out presidential pardons which are in my view nakedly political and/or corrupt. However, in his defence thus far he has used them relatively sparingly and hopefully won't do a last minute splurge like Bill Clinton did.

Well, at least Snowden might get his before he croaks; better shake than Alan Turing got.

 

[deleted20220709]

DELETED

 

[Silvanus]

I've heard the claim that his leaks endangered US troops, but I've never seen that proven.

I've heard it claimed. Not only have I never seen it proven, I've never even seen a convincing cause-effect suggested for how the leaks might have done so.

 

[Eacaraxe]

Of course, anyone involved with infosec are calling for him to be hanged. That these folk are also a lot of public faces for the Democrat machine has made a simple play unnecessarily messy.

By that you mean the US intelligence community, as empowered by Obama's partial repeal of the Smith-Mundt Act. No coincidence cable news started getting overloaded with spook and former spook talking heads between 2013-2016, which amazingly enough happened to be the time around which VOA was allowed to start broadcasting and streaming inside the territorial US.

Do these two actually have anything to do with the Democratic Party?

Yeah, they're both outspoken anti-Trump Comcast employees. More conceptually, the whole thing is a partisan shitstorm because Snowden made Obama look bad; the intelligence community never does bad things when a Democrat is president, and hypothetically speaking, if it did we're not supposed to talk about it.

 

[Worgen]

I've heard it claimed. Not only have I never seen it proven, I've never even seen a convincing cause-effect suggested for how the leaks might have done so.

I though he did redact information regarding troops and such. I know there was another whistle blower that just dumped a bunch of stuff and left all that open.

 

[09philj]

I'd prefer a president who genuinely believes in the righteousness of what Snowden did doing it for that reason, rather than a bigoted hypocrite doing it to court reelection, but if that's what it takes to get the feds of his back I'll take it.