http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/27/19166043-obama...
He's true though, it wasn't jets.
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/27/19166043-obama...
He's true though, it wasn't jets.
"The presidential plane of Bolivian leader Evo Morales was forced to ground in Vienna, after four EU nations refused airspace access on the mistaken belief that Snowden was hidden on board."
Can you imagine the feeling of impotence, as a national president, when your plane is forced to land because of such suspicions?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident
and picture from Reuters story:
It's this somewhat unnoticed fact of the saga: these agencies are really, really terrible at whatever they imagine their job to be. I wonder if there is still some intern at NSA combing manually through log files to figure out what Snowden possibly took.
It also speaks to the panic of the American government in those days about Snowden.
He literally meant "we're not going to send fighter jets to kill him." Taking that to mean "we're not going to try to get him should the opportunity present itself" is just not a realistic interpretation.
What the public assumes he means:
- "Three letter agencies and the military won't be conducting clandestine operations to proactively seek out and remove Snowden from a foreign country."
What he actually means:
- Quite literally, he's saying that they won't be sending fighter jets to go blow up Snowden. Of course that would be silly and not make any sense whatsoever, but it doesn't change the fact that this is what he was referring to.
Speaking of Clinton and document leaks, next time Hillary Clinton is asked about the classified email server scandal take note of her precise replies, it is impressive how politicians can fire out precise answers when pressured to both deflect and deny accusations and protect themselves at the same time by later claiming precision.