General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHow Washington Got Edward Snowden Wrong
How Washington Got Edward Snowden Wrong
The former NSA contractor set This Town's teeth on edge, but most Americans think he exposed something worth exposing.
Garance Franke-Ruta Jul 11 2013, 2:53 PM ET
...
"He's a traitor," House Speaker John Boehner told ABC's Good Morning America in mid-June. He articulated the views of many in official Washington when he added: "The disclosure of this information puts Americans at risk. It shows our adversaries what our capabilities are. And it's a giant violation of the law." Said Senate Intelligence Committee Dianne Feinstein, also in mid-June: "I don't look at this as being a whistleblower. I think it's an act of treason."
And yet, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday, "American voters" -- having had a bit of time to reflect on the question -- "say 55-34 percent that Edward Snowden is a whistle-blower, rather than a traitor."
"Almost every party, gender, income, education, age and income group regards Snowden as a whistle-blower rather than a traitor," the pollsters reported. "The lone exception is black voters, with 43 percent calling him a traitor and 42 percent calling him a whistle-blower."
...
The majority of voters do not think Snowden has betrayed his country, but rather provided important information about government wrongdoing. You would never know that from listening living in Washington, where an intelligence official recently told The Washington Post that the information Snowden obtained was "'not even close to the lion's share' of what the NSA is engaged in."
...
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/07/how-washington-got-edward-snowden-wrong/277670/
"'not even close to the lion's share' of what the NSA is engaged in."
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)is because full knowledge would piss off our allies and the US public, and likely isn't legal.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)I am not sure why he cant change it. Maybe if he wasnt forced to appoint Clapper, Mueller and Comey.
Some say he is the most powerful man in the world, yet he cant control the NSA, the FBI, the CIA, etc.
pscot
(21,024 posts)and that the country isn't really run by the government. OTOH, he never really attempted to rein in the security apparatus, so we don't actually know whether it's possible to do so.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Let's say that when Obama became president he meets with Clapper, Mueller, Comey, Alexander, etc. and they tell him that they are operating an elaborate security system (read spy system) that is guaranteed to keep America safe. They may even tell him that their programs are pushing the envelope on legality, but.......if he, Obama makes changes, like appointing some damn Constitutional loving liberals, then they cant be responsible for keeping American safe. Not a threat, just the facts. If a terrorist attack occurs on Obama's watch, and he messed with the system, bingo-bango Obama owns it.
galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)the standard is merely not to be worse than bush.
lather, rinse, repeat
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)When the government admits to taking an inch, you can be sure it took a mile.
Catherina
(35,568 posts)Life Long Dem
(8,582 posts)Then what he leaked should be able to stand on it's own and fixed without even mentioning Snowden.
burnodo
(2,017 posts)But for others, it was all about Snowden
kelliekat44
(7,759 posts)He signed a contract, he swore an oath, he planned this from the beginning...like an infiltrator. Then he fled. a whistleblower does not flee, faces the consequences. And on that poll, at least 50% of the folks voting that is a whistleblower are doing so just to strike against this administration. Dig down into the numbers.