201–210 of 363 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The U.S. would waive the death penalty to get him back from any of those countries, as they regularly do. I seriously doubt there is any chance they would seek it, anyway.
Some countries also prohibit extradition for life sentences. I remember hearing about one extradition case, they capped the sentence at 60 years, for that reason.
It looks like this charge can carry the death penalty because it involves "communications intelligence". From http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/794 : "(a) Whoever, with intent or reason to believe that it is to be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of a foreign nation, communicates, delivers, or transmits, or attempts to communicate, deliver, or transmit, to any foreign government, or…
If they didn't give Robert Hanssen the death penalty, I highly doubt Snowden is going to get it
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why such obsession about the law? Some laws are good, and that's good that they are enforced. Some laws are bad, and it is bad that they are enforced. The whole concept of "legality" is (sadly) appropriated by governments. The government invents the rules for itself and other organizations and individuums. They ca invent whatever rules they like. Gulag was perfectly legal. Nazi concentration camps were perfectly lega…
I'm not obsessed about the law. And honestly, I agree personally with everything Snowden did. I'm just disagreeing with the premise that even having a trial is itself unjust.
The dictionary definition is justice is "the quality of being fair and reasonable." Is there anything fair ad reasonable about how Snowden is about to be treated?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ... the sentence of death shall not be imposed unless the jury or, if there is no jury, the court , further finds ... Why even pretend it's a gov't for the people anymore?
You have the right to waive your right to a jury, as it turns out. There might be good reasons for this; maybe you do not believe it is possible for an unbiased jury to be assembled for your case (because it is all over the media and most people already think you are guilty). Maybe your defense hinges on highly technical details that an average juror cannot be expected to understand, but that a well-educated judge ca…
In fact, Pfc. Manning has done exactly this IIRC: He is asking for bench trial so that the judge alone decides his fate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The response they've given in the past to pardon petitions isn't much of a response at all. I expect a similar non-answer here. Cf. https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/why-we-cant-commen... https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/why-we-can’t-comme...
From the Bradley Manning link: "the White House may decline to address certain procurement, law enforcement, adjudicatory, or similar matters properly within the jurisdiction of federal departments or agencies, federal courts, or state and local government." This is a petition to pardon, which is solely the power of the President. They can't - with any legitimacy - claim that commenting on this would be stepping on s…
They can, as at this point he hasn't convicted. Promising to pardon (or declining to do so) in advance of trial would indeed be stepping on the legal system's toes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The response they've given in the past to pardon petitions isn't much of a response at all. I expect a similar non-answer here. Cf. https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/why-we-cant-commen... https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/response/why-we-can’t-comme...
That's actually really sad that they will blatantly not comment on a high profile petition.
If Hong Kong grants the "provisional arrest warrant" it could mean that Snowden will spend years fighting extradition from inside a jail cell. And it could be the end of any hopes of asylum in Iceland.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Soldiers are supposed to disobey their military superiors if told to commit crimes against humanity." Well, no. A soldier isn't supposed to say "I think that command is illegal under international law, therefore I will choose not to follow it." They'll be court-martialed, and rightly so. Choosing to make that call is intentionally risky, because it's supposed to be rare. Likewise, Snowden will be prosecuted...and ri…
Actually, in the U.S. servicemembers are supposed to refuse to follow orders that are not lawful. You are right that such cases are (and are meant to be) exceptionally rare. The U.S. Supreme Court gives exceptionally wide latitude in what counts as a lawful order, and as far as I know no servicemember has ever been tried (much less convicted) for following a valid order (even if they thought it was illegal). But with…
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 pardon petition also only needs more 7k signatures: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snow... Remember that the goal is to get the government address the issue, and show that the people are not fine with the NSA's actions. It would be nice to get them to actually pardon him, but that is a much harder goal.
Meanwhile, the petition to pardon him[1] only needs ~8000 more signatures to require a response. [1]: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snow...
Odd: I looked at the page an it said 7023 signatures required. Refreshed it to see if there was any delta and now it says 7041 signatures required. So 18 signatures have disappeared?
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/pardon-edward-snow...