281–290 of 404 posts
This is not news. Let's see him actually pardon Snowden, then talk about it.
Seven years ago, Trump said Snowden should be executed. Four years ago, in an interview, Obama refused to pardon Snowden. I’d say this is a notable development.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Using "leaker" instead of "whisteblower" is not necessarily wrong, just politically charged. Using "leaker" means you are ignoring that what he did was to blow whistle on illegal activities and only focusing on him.
Leaking was the method. It is a statement of fact that he was a leaker. It’s a statement of values/opinion that he was a whistleblower.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Entirely driven by congressional Republicans.
Umm... it was in his election platform. And of course he needed help from congress, he can't actually pass a bill without congress.
[0] https://publicintegrity.org/inequality-poverty-opportunity/t...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Using "leaker" instead of "whisteblower" is not necessarily wrong, just politically charged. Using "leaker" means you are ignoring that what he did was to blow whistle on illegal activities and only focusing on him.
Leaking was the method. It is a statement of fact that he was a leaker. It’s a statement of values/opinion that he was a whistleblower.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, the most important one. Hasn't invaded any new countries.
Unless you count the transformation of our friendly presence in Iraq to a hostile invasion opposed by the government. But, sure, he hasn't invaded any countries that weren't notionally friendly at the time of the invasion.
Once again I marvel at the flexibility of our English language in describing impossible concepts, such as this one.
I suppose on his mind this might fit with some sort of fight with the "deep state". Beyond that I would just chalk it up to some inherent capriciousness... bordering on concerning instability.
> does something I like > No! It doesn't matter, his motives must have been terrible. I will never understand this kind of reaction, when you get so emotional about something that all pragmatism goes out the window.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Both
Using "leaker" instead of "whisteblower" is not necessarily wrong, just politically charged. Using "leaker" means you are ignoring that what he did was to blow whistle on illegal activities and only focusing on him.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He was not a Government employee at the time. Contractors don't get to be whistle blowers. EDIT: Turns out the law does protect contractors, so I guess it's circumstantial that employees get branded whistle blowers and contractors get charged as spies.
Brilliant, just hire contractors to get around good governance rules :)