U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage • Hacker News Board

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#141

Post by achughes » Fri, Jun 21, 2013, 11:59 PM UTC

devb wrote: post #75

achughes wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they didn't give Robert Hanssen the death penalty, I highly doubt Snowden is going to get it

The federal government pursued the death penalty against Brian Patrick Regan in 2003. The jury decided against the punishment, however, and is now serving a life sentence without parole.

He had also made an offer to foreign governments to sell the information, and judging by the fact that he was carrying classified documents with him when he was arrested, I'd say that he planned on acting on those offers. By contrast, AFAIK Snowden has made no such offer and has not talked with the Chinese government.

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#142

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 12:00 AM UTC

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #7

So now is the time to identify the federal prosecutors who filed this and petition the government to have them fired. In addition, of course, to asking for a complete pardon for Snowden. It also should be noted that any of the Congressional investigations into this mess are perfectly capable of giving Snowden a grant of immunity from prosecution. People ask what to do. There are at least two avenues open to nip this…

[deleted]

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#143

Post by blueprint » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 12:01 AM UTC

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #7

So now is the time to identify the federal prosecutors who filed this and petition the government to have them fired. In addition, of course, to asking for a complete pardon for Snowden. It also should be noted that any of the Congressional investigations into this mess are perfectly capable of giving Snowden a grant of immunity from prosecution. People ask what to do. There are at least two avenues open to nip this…

How should we go about identifying the federal prosecutors?

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#144

Post by dragonwriter » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 12:03 AM UTC

bbatsell wrote: post #135

evilduck wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has any whitehouse.gov petition ever led to actual action being taken?

Here are the ones I can recall off the top of my head: * CISPA veto threat/defeat [ https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/cybersecurity-legi... ] * New open-access rules [ https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/increasing-public-... ] * Halting use of animals in military training [ https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/immediately-halt-c... ]

The animals one obviously doesn't count [1], since the petition was created September 27th, 2011, and the order halting the use of animals was issued September 20th, 2011.

[1] Barring time travel

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#145

Post by cantos » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 12:05 AM UTC

sigzero wrote: post #65

jlgreco wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, but that is a poor reason to not make your voice heard.

Who do you think is reading that petition? I would postulate, only the signers. You also make it sound like that is the only way to get your voice "heard".

I postulate that it would be a good place to start.

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#146

Post by neurotech1 » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 12:13 AM UTC

zacharyvoase wrote: post #69

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #7

So now is the time to identify the federal prosecutors who filed this and petition the government to have them fired. In addition, of course, to asking for a complete pardon for Snowden. It also should be noted that any of the Congressional investigations into this mess are perfectly capable of giving Snowden a grant of immunity from prosecution. People ask what to do. There are at least two avenues open to nip this…

The role of the prosecutor is to prosecute the interests of the State, which in this case they have done. I’m wondering how grand juries play into this—the Fifth Amendment states that “no person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury” (except for those in the military, which I think he wouldn’t classify as). There’s a great article her…

I remember reading several points(Wikipedia) 98% Grand Juries return an indictment, rarely narrowing or broadening the charges;

90% of Federal Criminal Cases are Plea Bargained before trial;

90% of Federal Criminal trials result in a conviction;

This is why the Aaron Swartz was so wrong, once the prosecutor decided to overzealously present the charges to a grand jury, the odds were stacked against him.

Snowden is in big trouble, because in this case its highly unlikely that President Obama will pardon him, although popularly requested to do so.

So yes, the whole prosecution process has runaway from the original goal of justice.

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#147

Post by betterunix » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 12:14 AM UTC

bbatsell wrote: post #135

evilduck wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has any whitehouse.gov petition ever led to actual action being taken?

Here are the ones I can recall off the top of my head: * CISPA veto threat/defeat [ https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/cybersecurity-legi... ] * New open-access rules [ https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/increasing-public-... ] * Halting use of animals in military training [ https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/immediately-halt-c... ]

I am pretty sure the CISPA veto and the open access rules were only tangentially affected by the petitions. The open access rules were a response to the treatment of Aaron Swartz, which was creating a media storm that was causing more people to notice the general abuses of power by prosecutors in this country. The CISPA veto threat followed pressure from lobbyists and well-connected corporations.

Did the petitions matter at all? Maybe, but they were not even remotely close to being sufficient to get the administration to do anything. The Obama administration already knows how people feel about the Snowden situation; the petition is basically irrelevant.

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#148

Post by malandrew » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 12:15 AM UTC

Personally, I would want him to stand trial on two conditions:

(1) He and Glenn Greenwald are allowed to have an open, public televised debate with President Obama, the congressmen that are members of the intelligence committee, and the judges that sit on the FISC court. This would be done in 3 sessions Frost/Nixon style.

(2) He is promised fair just treatment, that is made public so that he cannot be subjected to solitary confinement and other torturous conditions.

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#149

Post by cbhl » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 12:16 AM UTC

brown9-2 wrote: post #102

wavesounds wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not if your a whistleblower. What if instead of a domestic spying program he leaked a secret program by his bosses to round up every red haired and freckled person and put them in a concentration camp? Then would you still have to charge him with a crime for revealing a 'secret' program before he could be pardoned and treated as a hero? Of course not, thats ridiculous and so is this.

But he didn't do that. Are you a whistleblower if what you reveal isn't illegal?

It would be (relatively) trivial for congress to decide to make it so that "rounding up every red haired and freckled person and putting them in a concentration camp" would be legal.

The question isn't legality, per se - it's whether we believe that it follows the values and principles that we want our country to have.

Re: U.S. charges Edward Snowden with espionage

#150

Post by LoganCale » Sat, Jun 22, 2013, 12:17 AM UTC

rdouble wrote: post #125

brown9-2 wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't you think that maybe they leaked the most interesting stuff first? This stuff has started to fall out of the news. It's past time to keep the story going. Perhaps there was a limit to the documents he was able to scavenge.

If I could gamble on this topic, my bet would be that there isn't any more interesting information. That said, I am interested in learning what the rest of the information is, so I can make up my own mind about the issue.

Did you miss the new documents published yesterday? They've been all over HN today, and they contradict most everything Obama and the NSA have been saying for the past week.