I don't think Snowden was right. He was, in fact, wrong as a matter of the law and the Constitution. His concerns were misplaced. Okay, that's fine. But then, rather than doing the honourable thing and resigning — and keeping his oath — he betrayed his oath, he betrayed the trust placed in him, stole information he had no right to access in the first place and fled, first to Communist China and then to Neostalinist Russia (rather neatly giving the lie to his claims to care about human rights: the one government harvests organs from religious dissidents and the other detonated bombs in apartment buildings in order to solidify political power).
I am thoroughly convinced that a) not all Snowden has alleged is true; b) that which is alleged and true is legal and constitutional; and c) that which is both alleged and true is not something so immoral that despite being legal and constitutional it should be avoided anyway. Moreover, I am convinced that his behaviour meets the standard for treason.
If our laws are ever unjust, or our justice system ever fallible, the argument "it was illegal" cannot be used to justify whether something was moral. US law is a terrible basis for morality and that's a super weak argument.
Treason is the systemic and illegal invasion of the rights hundreds of millions of Americans, corrupt government officials quashing all means of accountability, lying under oath to congress, intentionally misleading congress and the American people, and refusing to enforce any sort of due process of law when it's been discovered that people were doing highly illegal things.
> Treason is the systemic and illegal invasion of the rights hundreds of millions of Americans, corrupt government officials quashing all means of accountability, lying under oath to congress, intentionally misleading congress and the American people, and refusing to enforce any sort of due process of law when it's been discovered that people were doing highly illegal things.
I'm sorry, but really really wanting those things to be treasonous does not make them treason.
Your gut is not the US Code. The US Code has no provisions that cause things to become treason by chaining enough increasingly emphasizing adjectives together.
If you argued this in court, you would lose.
For my part: I don't like that Snowden took incredibly serious (forget illegal) actions that served to cast aspersions on both the one and only meaningful US cybersecurity institution and the legitimacy of the United States government as a whole, and is now being harbored by Putin. Are people not seeing what has happened since? Russia is overtly inserting themselves into our domestic politics, and for the political feasibility of doing so, they should be (and by harboring a fugitive, absolutely are) thanking one Edward Joseph Snowden.
They're leveraging Assange as another mouthpiece, although there they get to hide behind being "Random Joe Public" donating to wikileaks. (And if you provide cover noise by doing so yourself: Stop. You're being played.)
What Snowden's actions predictably precipitated is incredibly ominous. I don't care how much pseudo-"Orwellian" surveillance was going on (that - do people not get this? - was not being abused. There were no mass arrests of people who arranged drug buys on facebook, or via gmail or whatever. Nobody knew it was happening prior to Snowden's actions - which is actually not true at all, anyone paying attention (raises hand) knew since the Room 641a disclosures in, what, 2006? Snowden was merely a far-more willing talking head - but I digress. The point is: if a whistleblower had to tell you they were reading every last email, clearly they weren't exactly doing a lot with that capability!). That does not in any way compare to giving an actual dictator of an an actual authoritarian party and government an unprecedented and dangerous level of leverage and influence and dirt on our democracy. Hell no, go directly to jail, do not collect $200, there doesn't need to be any detente with Moscow until Snowden is extradited.
A pardon? Give me a break. As far as I'm concerned, this petition is an instrument of the Kremlin, meant to further extend their ill intent into our country. No.
Was he? The Constitution provides us right to basic privacy against searches without warrants and due process for executive action. NSA was violating one with surveillance tech and other with parallel construction. Congress is supposed to hold executive branch accountable but was throwing away GAO's reports on abuses. Executive Branch was supposed to tell Americans truth about how they were approaching the surveillance issue and its affectiveness. They lied about both. They also had FBI raid the houses of those who used internal channels to complain about actual corruption like Trailblazer & ignoring Constitution. Finally, the judicial system that's supposed to hold other two in account was (a) provided with disinformation and (b) told in Jewel case that it had no business making rulings on the topic. So, Congress and Executive were corrupt in this case with Judicial powerless.
Only thing left in Constitution is leaks (First Amendment) with a follow-up of jury nullification, Presidential pardon, or selective application of 2nd Amendment. Leaks while in hiding hoping for first two is nicer than number three. I agree with critics that he shouldn't have leaked foreign ops and maybe should get less leniency for that. However, the whole first paragraph of my reply is guilt across the board esp in Congress and Executive branch. He shouldn't be tried unless they are for the crimes he revealed. He should also get leniency for bringing the domestic abuses to our attention. Binney et al, who played it responsibly, should get full immunity plus their paychecks for their service.
"Moreover, I am convinced that his behaviour meets the standard for treason."
Treason is killing 6,000+ Americans, maiming more, and costing us trillions in liabilities by use of disinformation to start a war for political purposes. That's straight-up murdering us. Snowden did a mix of whistleblowing on domestic stuff Alexander/Clapper lied about under oath, whistleblowing on key foreign stuff that could've damaged us due to stupidity of politicians, and a traitor on foreign, operational stuff that's the whole point of NSA's existence (as in: legitimate). So, he's a mixed bag with worst result being they get less automated spying on some groups. (shrugs)
Note: I also don't fully trust him as his statements changed a few times, he's a trained spy, and he conned his coworkers for their passwords. He's sneaky when he thinks it's justified for his mission. My calculations above are strictly based on statements/actions of corrupt government vs specific things he leaked. He looks like a saint compared to them, esp in terms of innocent blood on hands.
Unveiling a trove of illegal projects being undertaken by our government against our wishes would fall into this category in my mind.