houdini1984
8 hours ago
In a perfect world, Snowden would have been able to report the IC's violation of Americans' rights to Congress. He should have attempted to do so. But is he a traitor? Hardly.

Here's the thing. We're talking about a Congress that failed to punish the intelligence community for... wait for it... spying on Congress. Yes, that's right. The IC was literally spying on our representatives, and forced to admit to those activities. And what did Congress do? They continued to renew all the powers that the IC regularly abuses.

Anyone who's paying attention understands that our elected representatives are, almost to a man and woman, scared to death of this country's intelligence community. They are terrified that their own secrets may be used against them by a vengeful IC. They are willing to sacrifice your liberties to maintain some semblance of peaceful coexistence between themselves and the forces of the deep state.

So, yeah. Snowden's actions are easy to criticize. And they were illegal, in the purest sense of that word. But was he wrong to distrust Congress? Was he right to believe that the American people deserve to know that their government is violating their rights on a daily basis? Did he have an obligation to choose between going to prison or remaining silent?

Personally, I am glad that the truth came out. And I don't blame Tulsi one bit for refusing to be nagged into calling the man a traitor. That nagging is just designed to distract from the real issue, which is that our government has long been weaponized against us.

anon-w8wg houdini1984
5 hours ago edited
Snowden was kind of simultaneously hero and traitor. His actions absolutely threw a wrench in America's military and intelligence gears (I was in the military at the time). However, he brought to light things that the people needed to know, things that never should have been approved. Personally, I don't have a problem calling him traitor. I have no problem with Tulsi Gabbard not calling him a traitor, though, as long as she notes what was bad about his actions. She did this, which makes her more qualified than most intelligence directors, IMHO.

In fact, now that I think of it, Snowden might have helped put us on the MAGA track. So, maybe there's more good to him than I've given him credit for.

Random US Citizen
11 hours ago
What Snowden did was illegal and punishable by law. On the other hand, Gabbard is right—he also exposed a lot of domestic spying by the U.S. government against its own citizens. It’s interesting—in a sort of horrifying way—that so-called conservative Republicans are more upset that Gabbard opposes Patriot Act overreach than any other issue that came up at her confirmation hearing.

anon-bjec NightStalker
9 hours ago
I doubt we would have had one Trump presidency, much less two, without Snowden. Who would have believed the massive duplicity with which the deep state acts? A lot of us might have actually bought into the RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA nonsense, not believed it was even possible for Obama to weaponize the IC against a political opponent. A lot fewer people would have been aware of just how bad the IC and deep state are when operating domestically.

People like Schifty Schiff see Russians under every rock without stepping back to see the big picture. Snowden exposed sources and methods alright. Sources: massive domestic spying apparatus weaponized against Americans. Methods: outrageous violations of every basic tenet of the Constitution and founding principles.

We needed to know.