301–310 of 404 posts
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.
If I witness a robbery in progress, and I call the cops, am I a leaker?
This is not news. Let's see him actually pardon Snowden, then talk about it.
Considering 3-4 years ago he referred to him as a traitor, I'd say the significant shift in stance is news. Should a pardon happen, this would set an important precedent for future whistleblowers and for the rule of law in the often obfuscated corners of the federal government. Support the efforts of Rand Paul and Thomas Massie, who have already publicly stated their support for a Presidential pardon in this case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Snowden's method of whistleblowing was leaking documents to the press. He is both.
It's all semantics, he revealed valuable knowledge to the public about how the government was unConstitutionally surveilling them at every opportunity without remorse or apology
If you killed someone committing their own separate crime, you'd be both a killer and potentially a hero.
It is important to make clear he both committed a very serious crime and potentially blew the whistle in act of bravery.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Grey comments like this are a reminder that the american tech industry has reached a point where you're only allowed to advocate for one set of ideas out loud (what a coincidence considering where SV and SF are). Nothing this person said is wrong or phrased in a hostile manner but the comment is going grey for simply acknowledging the nuance of the topic. As someone who grew up as a dem during a time when dems were t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's easy to promise controversial things that require Congressional action and cannot pass Congress. The President -no matter who they are or what Congressional action they promised- can't even push their allies in Congress to do something that can't work because of the filibuster or lack of sufficient majorities. Every candidate, and every President, promises things that they know Congress won't likely deliver -- c…
What you say is true. And all I'm saying in turn is that Trump strikes me as being unusually insincere, even for a politician, in terms of the things he talks up and then never throws any meaningful support behind. Yes, all politicians pander, but I think this particular politician has made it an art form like few others.
Carry reciprocity is kind of a niche issue, lacks enough popularity, and is hard to make more popular. Well, maybe now that the gun stores are empty and millions more are armed than were before March, maybe now carry reciprocity can become popular enough. Before March, the 2A was just barely popular enough to be difficult to gut.
I dunno, if you really care about that one issue, you know Biden won't give it to you (he's not even promising it, and it's not something Democrats want, obviously, else it would have passed already). Trump can't give it to you unless the needle has moved a lot, which... maybe it just-now has. So if this is your one issue, I'm shocked you'd be so angry as to hold it against Trump that he's not been able to deliver it to you. There must be like, three people who care so much about just this one issue. Maybe you could use more issues to make up your mind.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've addressed the President's possible motivations. But, do you think Snowden should be pardoned? Just curious. (It's a tough call. I've not decided my own position on the matter.)
Yes, he should be pardoned. Just because toddlers can't distinguish the nuance between the following the law and discretionary breaking of it, it doesn't mean the rest of us with developed prefrontal cortex have to put up with spending taxpayer dollars on a trial just to show consistency. People are more concerned about other people showing us shady things intelligence community does, than what Edward Snowden did. Wh…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
they've intentionally selected the word due to it's negative context. The usage of "leaker" allows them to play to the 'orange man bad' narrative, which they value more than getting Snowden pardoned.
Are there any measurable metrics by which he is doing a good job?
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.
This is a good thing, right? Polititians try to do the right things to win votes. This is how democracy works.
It is the right thing when they have consistent ideas they do - or will implement. It is the wrong thing when they publicly consider a bunch of things they won't do, or do tiny but loud actions without consistency, that are not aligned with their political agenda but just wish to win votes. Disclaimer: I'm not American, but that's a pattern we unfortunately see a lot these days
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/353571-a-foolish-consistenc...
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/738162-i-do-not-believe-tha...
“I do not believe that the solution to our problem is simply to elect the right people. The important thing is to establish a political climate of opinion which will make it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing. Unless it is politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing, the right people will not do the right thing either, or it they try, they will shortly be out of office.” -Milton Friedman
^^^^
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
It has a name now... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_derangement_syndrome
I agree, TDS is a pretty catchy term when you want to deflect from trumps corruption.