Posted on 06/10/2013 7:31:41 AM PDT by maggief
(CHICAGO)
(snip)
Former U.S. Ambassador John Bolton told Bruce Wolf and Dan Proft on WLS that he thinks admitted leaker Edward Snowden, is guilty of treason:
"Number one, this man is a liar. He took an oath to keep the secrets that were shared with him so he could do his job. He said said he would not disclose them, and he lied. Number two, he lied because he thinks he's smarter and has a higher morality than the rest of us. This guy thinks he has a higher morality, that he can see clearer than other 299-million 999-thousand 999 of us, and therefore he can do what he wants. I say that is the worst form of treason".
(Excerpt) Read more at wlsam.com ...
“He said that Snowden has committed”Treason”because he thought he was doing”The Right Thing”and yet the other 299.999 million of us think otherwise?”
What arrogance for Bolton to think he speaks for the other 299.999 million of us. Since when is he our mouthpiece?
No. You are a great conservative. You mentioned a key phrase that separates the wheat from the chaffe around here. You said “I don’t know”. Frankly we don’t have quite enough information quite yet to completely sort this out. However I wonder if we will ever get the truth from this bunch in DC. In any event whoever broke laws should go to jail. That goes for all sides of this issue.
“I would argue google and yahoo know more about us than the NSA.”
Probably so, and Amazon knows what I’m going to order before I do, but I engage in that transaction willingly and knowingly.
It ticks me off when the MSM excuses governmental invasion of privacy because we give up our privacy on the internet to corporations. It’s not the same thing at all. Government invasion is surreptitious, all invasive, and has punitive force behind it.
I agree with you and Rand Paul and amazingly this time with Daniel Ellsberg whose Pentagon Papers case (much worse than the Snowden leak) was thrown out by the courts.
I do wonder how the Ellsberg precedent favors Snowden should he be brought to trial?
Terrorists used temporary phones which they buy at the corner store and which they throw away after a brief period of use. Totally untraceable. We know this. We've known this for over 10 years.
NSA wasn't tracing them. NSA was tracing US citizens who own things like homes, land lines, long-term cell phone contracts, etc.
It's not about terrorism. It's about controlling Americans.
Coming forward might actually improve his safety. Snowden implied the federal government makes people—I presume terrorists—disappear. Snowden could have very well died from an unexpected heart attack or something if he hadn’t come forward. By making himself a public figure, he might be improving his odds...sorry to say.
>>FWIW everyone whose name appears on the Declaration of Independence was guilty of Treason.<<
Nice point. But to expand upon it, had they not successfully revolted, many of the signers would have likely been put to death for treason by the British eventually.
I think that’s what we’re missing here. An act of treason means you’re abandoning your country; you’ve given up on going a more conventional route to right a wrong. Have we reached the point where treason is justified, or was there a legal, i.e., non-treasonous, route for him to take? Were there no legislators in the loop that he could have gone to, or no Inspectors General? If not, he might have felt that the course the Founders took was his only option, but in doing so, he was abandoning his own government, as did the Founders.
One thing I’m certain of. Had the mainstream press in this country done its civic (and professional) duty, Snowden’s actions would not have been necessary. As many have pointed out, we’ve suspected this sort of abuse all along, and it wouldn’t have taken long for a diligent press to dig out most of it. Instead, 90 percent of them have devoted their efforts to re-bury what has already been dug up, Fast and Furious, and Benghazi both being prime examples.
After all, who broke all this? The Guardian of New York City or Washington D.C.? Hardly. That alone speaks volumes.
Its seems as though the govt has got something on Bolton, probably picked up via the NSA. Now he has to say what he is told, pose as a conservative, but do the regime’s bidding.
“I think that, technically, Bolton is correct. It’s pretty black and white.
However, the devil’s in the details.”
Yup. And not everything stupid is unconstitutional.
Manning was a soldier in the US military. There’s a difference here. We ALL know that the government is spying on us. Snowden just revealed the depth.
Also, Manning revealed specific classified documents implicating people by name. Snowden revealed generalities about the program. No one was specifically implicated.
He told us nothing new,but brought great attention to the issue! Is Ed Snowden his real name? Does he still work for the CIA under cover ?
Are they trying to force 0 to play his hand?
Yes, he did.
He told us that the government, in pursuit of single terrorists, has gotten warrants and OK’s to snatch the data of everyone.
Let me put it to you thusly:
What we’re learning now is that the government suspects that there *might* be a drug dealer in your neighborhood. So as a result, they got a warrant to conduct black-bag operations on every house in the neighborhood. While you’re at work (or whereever), they let themselves into your house and search all your personal property for evidence, then they leave.
Did they ever suspect you or your family? “Noooooo....” they protest.
But they searched your house.
“For your safety,” they claim.
Did they find the drug dealer?
“Ummm..... no, but we’ll do better in the future.”
There, now you’ve had it explained to you.
I am all for killing known, proven, Islamic Terrorists with these strikes.
But, under Obama, we could soone see them extended to an American citizen who is simply opposing the Obama administration's illegal and unconstitutional acts, and is willing (and brave enough) to stand up and openly say something against it.
*************
That was my original (rhetorical) question--
I believe there are some "in the making"....
... and some already in public life who have only to shake off the fear of Chicago crowd.
And if we can't find one/some...
Perhaps we should offer to BECOME the voice(s) America needs to hear....
No offense meant earlier... & none taken
Enjoy your day.
The NSA has traditionally been separate from other agencies such as the FBI. The FBI still has to get a court order, warrant, or administrative summons/subpoena to obtain phone records. They did that in the case of Rosen and the media investigation for leaks.
This tells me the firewalls are still in place given that those investigations were the highest priority. There is no way Holder would have signed off on the Rosen affidavit if the DOJ could access the information through other secret means.
By law, the oversight of these programs is supposed to be done by congress. So far, the reaction of congress critters on that committee tells me they knew and agreed. I think most of us have always assumed this capability and program existed. I think many of us have always believed this argument was inevitable.
The NSA’s activities overseas have never bothered me. The NSA’s obvious activities within our own borders causes me great concern.
If what he says is true, there is NO WAY he could stay anonymous.
I don’t know if they have something on him, or he’s part of the protected elite ... perhaps both.
I reached that conclusion a couple years back when he came out in favor of sodomite fake marriage.
All this makes me wonder if the Winklevoss twins were telling the truth about their ideas and code being stolen. Maybe it was. With this kind of technological data mining any sort of proprietary information is a sitting duck for someone corrupt in the palace of ‘knowledge’.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.