Snowden: none dare call it treason
Actually, some do. But the charges filed by federal prosecutors under the Espionage Act against Edward Snowden don’t:
Snowden has been charged with three violations: theft of government property and two offenses under the espionage statutes, specifically giving national defense information to someone without a security clearance and revealing classified information about “communications intelligence.”
Each of the charges carries a maximum of 10 years in prison…
The U.S. has filed a “provisional arrest warrant,” formally asking the police in Hong Kong to arrest Snowden. Because the FBI has no jurisdiction outside U.S. borders, U.S. prosecutors must ask local police to make the arrest.
The arrest would start the formal extradition process in court, which will be governed by Chinese law and could take several months to resolve.
But by then, Snowden may be in Iceland or elsewhere. My best guess is that he will avail himself of one of the offers that will come his way through his many supporters around the world and flee to territory even less cooperative with the US than Hong Kong and the Chinese courts.
Wikileaks is helping him, naturally. As I’m sure are groups such as this one run by Daniel Ellsberg (don’t know if that exact group is still in operation, but I have little doubt there are plenty of others, and my guess would be that they helped him before the fact as well as after), about which I wrote in 2006. A brief excerpt from a much longer article:
“The Truth-Telling Project””“now, what might that be? Wretchard quotes from its web page, which offers the following description of the organization’s purpose and function:
The Truth-Telling Coalition, comprised of high-level national security truth-tellers, as well as non-profit whistleblower organizations, provides a personal and legal support network for each other and for government insiders considering becoming truth-tellers.
So, according to its own description, the group appears to be an organization dedicated to supporting the spilling of secrets by national security officers…
There doesn’t seem to be much question that Snowden is guilty of these particular charges. Although there may be some finer points that escape me, it appears pretty straightforward. And according to what I’ve read (which is hardly comprehensive), whether or not the disclosures have actually done damage to national security doesn’t seem to need to be proven in order to convict. If vows of secrecy in security matters are to mean anything, this must be the case.
Of course, Snowden’s defenders—such as accomplice after the fact journalist Glenn Greenwald—say the government is being “vindictive” in charging him. Surprise, surprise:
[Greenwald] told MSNBC’s Chris Hayes that it’s not surprising that the Obama administration would, once again, engage in severe “overcharging” when what Snowden did, as Greenwald argued, was “not espionage in any real sense of the word.”
Greenwald noted that Snowden didn’t work for a foreign government, he didn’t provide information directly to America’s enemies, and he didn’t sell any top-secret information, so the espionage charge seems extreme to him.
Only one possible catch (although I doubt it would be one to trouble Greenwald): the counts with which Snowden was charged, listed above, don’t appear to require those elements to be present, although they do come under the Espionage Act. But if you read the charges’ language here, the definitions of the crimes do not seem to require foreign recipients, just ones who are unauthorized, and the first charge (theft) doesn’t require recipients at all. At least, that’s my reading of it, although I’m hardly an expert on the matter. And the penalties are also relatively mild, considering the possibilities.
As I already said, though, I believe Snowden will walk (or rather fly, to Iceland or some other amenable place) and the US will be impotent in this as in so many other matters. As for those of you who foresee a drone (or other method of killing) in Snowden’s future, I think it would generate too much negative publicity for the US to do such a thing, although I imagine Obama would dearly love to.
[NOTE: The title of this post comes from a book of the early ’60s written by John A Stormer. I’ve never read it, but it was very well-known in my youth:
Stormer’s main book None Dare Call It Treason argued that America was losing the cold war because it was being betrayed by its elites, who were procommunist. The title of the book is derived from an epigram of Sir John Harington: “Treason doth never prosper. What’s the reason? Why if it prosper, none dare call it treason.” It was published in 1964, during Barry Goldwater’s bid for the presidency, and sold over one million copies in the first six months.
Sounds sort of apropos, doesn’t it?]
I’ve read the book and still have it. It seems rather prescient these days.
Short form: “Provides proof the government is spying on citizens. Government charges him with spying.”
“although I imagine Obama would dearly love to.”
Nah. Obama doesn’t give one tenth of a tinker’s dam about Snowden. Doesn’t matter to the O at all.
The type of charges brought may have something to do with the extradition agreement with Hong Kong. I’d personally like to see Snowden end up in Camp 14.
vanderleun:
Are you kidding me? I completely disagree with your reading of Obama’s psyche.
You may mean that Obama doesn’t care about national security leaks per se all that much, and with that I heartily agree. But Obama cares about Obama, and these particular leaks left Obama with egg on his face vis a vis the left, who consider that Obama’s support of the phone records program exposes him as too Bush-like.
Obama takes things personally, and Snowden’s actions were a defiance of Obama and exposed him to anger and ridicule from his usual supporters. That, Obama cares about, quite a bit. It’s personal.
“You may mean that Obama doesn’t care about national security leaks per se all that much, and with that I heartily agree.”
Yes, that is what I mean.
Then again Obama is such a towering narcissist and such a deep and abiding psychopath it is doubtful that he cares about the feelings of his usual supporters. He knows they will be back on the O-tit soon enough and that they have no other place to go.
Indeed, he knows they somehow love the feeling of being eaten alive by this organism.
How will charging Snowden with espionage get the egg off Obama’s face with the left (and the right)? This will only reinforce the perception that the NSA surveillance was an abuse of power.
Steve:
It won’t get the egg off his face. But it will show that he means business about leaks that he himself hasn’t authorized, and perhaps discourage future ones. Inaction would encourage them.
Although I must say that Snowden’s celebrity status, which Obama can’t do anything about, would encourage copycats (much as, I believe, Assange’s celebrity status did for Snowden).
For BHO everything is deeply personal. If a gnat lands on his arugula salad he takes it personally and is ready to call in the secret service to kill the gnat. That is what makes him so dangerous. He’s not really the president, he’s the dictator in waiting.
If not extradited, Snowden will tragically fall down a long staircase or become depressed and suffer a shotgun to the back of the head suicide
I think Obama will have a hard time living down the domestic spying revelations:
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/nancy-pelosi-booed-netroots-nation-2013-93193.html
Steve,
I love how she had to get the Bush comparison into her talk. Somebody needs to do an alternative history movie about how Obama would have handled 9/11. I bet he would have put down My Pet Goat and gone to take a nap.
A nap followed by a fundraiser.
On the scale of treason, 1 to 10:
Snowden is a two. Maybe a one.
Obama is an 11.
Mike:
The charge against Snowden is not treason.
Okay. If a thing is not charged, it therefore does not exist.
On the scale of criminally or non-criminally harming the United States of America:
Snowden is a 2. maybe a 1. Maybe a negative 10 in that he really helped the country.
Obama is an 11.
And the people who support Obama are 12s.
Mike:
Why would you think anyone here is implying that “if a thing is not charged, it therefore does not exist?”
Because you were talking about Snowden committing treason, and the subject matter of this post is what offenses Snowden was charged with, I was merely pointing out he hasn’t been charged with treason, or even espionage as most people understand it, although the charges come under the Espionage Act. Nor was the charge that he criminally or non-criminally harmed the US, for that matter.
I just saw that he’s on his way to Venezuela.
“…the first charge (theft) doesn’t require recipients at all. At least, that’s my reading of it, although I’m hardly an expert on the matter.”
I can tell you this much: anyone caught with classified documents (paper or digital form, such as CD or thumb drive) in his/her home has broken the law–even if the documents have been shown to no one and the person has no association whatsoever with any of “America’s enemies.” There is a strict protocol dictating how to get such documents from a locked safe, use them for a time, and then return them to a safe. Any deviation from these procedures (such as taking them home without special permission to do so) is a crime.
Gee, I wonder if Wikileaks, Ellsberg’s group or any of the other so-called “Truth-Telling” entities are helping leak information about Benghazi, IRS targeting of tea-party groups (and others), Fast and Furious, misuse of “Stimulus Package” money and various other scandals happening under King Barack’s administration.
Crimes don’t affect Democrats. Or even Leftists that lack the approval of the ruling caste.