Congressional report slams NSA leaker Edward Snowden

[webfact]

Congressional report slams NSA leaker Edward Snowden 
DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press

 

WASHINGTON (AP) — A House intelligence committee report issued Thursday condemned Edward Snowden, saying the National Security Agency leaker is not a whistleblower and that the vast majority of the documents he stole were defense secrets that had nothing to do with privacy.

 

The Republican-led committee released a three-page unclassified summary of its two-year bipartisan examination of how Snowden was able to remove more than 1.5 million classified documents from secure NSA networks, what the documents contained and the damage their removal caused to U.S. national security.

 

Snowden was an NSA contract employee when he took the documents and leaked them to journalists who revealed massive domestic surveillance programs begun in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. The programs collected the telephone metadata records of millions of Americans and examined emails from overseas. Snowden fled to Hong Kong, then Russia, to avoid prosecution and now wants a presidential pardon as a whistleblower.

 

Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., chairman of the committee, said Snowden betrayed his colleagues and his country.

 

"He put our service members and the American people at risk after perceived slights by his superiors," Nunes said in a statement. "In light of his long list of exaggerations and outright fabrications detailed in this report, no one should take him at his word. I look forward to his eventual return to the United States, where he will face justice for his damaging crimes."

 

Snowden insists he has not shared the full cache of 1.5 million classified documents with anyone. However, the report notes that in June, the deputy chairman of the Russian parliament's defense and security committee publicly conceded that "Snowden did share intelligence" with his government.

 

Ben Wizner, Snowden's attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union, blasted the report, saying it was an attempt to discredit a "genuine American hero."

 

"After years of investigation, the committee still can't point to any remotely credible evidence that Snowden's disclosures caused harm," Wizner said. "In a more candid moment, the NSA's former deputy director, who was directly involved in the government's investigation, explicitly said he didn't believe Snowden had cooperated with either China or Russia."

 

Snowden's revelations about the agency's bulk collection of millions of Americans' phone records set off a fierce debate that pit civil libertarians concerned about privacy against more hawkish lawmakers fearful about losing tools to combat terrorism. Democrats and libertarian-leaning Republicans pushed through a reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act last year that ended the program.

 

There was little evidence that the phone records or other surveillance programs Snowdenrevealed ever thwarted an attack.

Snowden is seeking a presidential pardon because he says he helped his country by revealing secret domestic surveillance programs. Separately, all members of the committee sent a bipartisan letter to President Barack Obama urging him not to pardon Snowden.

 

"The vast majority of what he took has nothing to do with American privacy," said Rep. Adam Schiff of California, the ranking Democrat on the House intelligence committee.

 

"The majority of what he took has to do with military secrets and defense secrets," Schiff said in an interview Thursday for C-SPAN's "Newsmakers." ''I think that's very much at odds with the narrative that he wants to tell that he is a whistleblower."

 

The Obama administration has urged Snowden to return to the U.S. and face trial. Justice Department spokesman Marc Raimondi has said "there is no question his actions have inflicted serious harms on our national security."

 

The committee report says that he was a "disgruntled employee who had frequent conflicts with his managers."

 

Publicly revealing classified information does not qualify someone as a whistleblower, the report said. The committee "found no evidence that Snowden took any official effort to express concerns about U.S. intelligence activities to any oversight officials within the U.S. government, despite numerous avenues for him to do so."

 

According to the committee, Snowden began mass downloads of classified material two weeks after he was reprimanded for engaging in a spat with NSA managers. The committee also described Snowden as a "serial exaggerator and fabricator."

 

"A close review of Snowden's official employment records and submissions reveals a pattern of intentional lying," the report said. "He claimed to have left Army basic training because of broken legs when in fact he washed out because of shin splints. He claimed to have obtained a high school degree equivalent when in fact he never did. "

 

The report said Snowden claimed to have worked for the CIA as a senior adviser, when he was a computer technician.

 

"He also doctored his performance evaluations and obtained new positions at NSA by exaggerating his resume and stealing the answers to an employment test," the report said.

 

Speaking by video link from Moscow, Snowden said Wednesday that whistleblowing "is democracy's safeguard of last resort, the one on which we rely when all other checks and balances have failed and the public has no idea what's going on behind closed doors."

 

The 33-year-old addressed a New York City news conference where advocates from the American Civil Liberties Union, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International announced an online petition drive to urge Obama to pardon Snowden before he leaves office. The supporters called Snowden a hero for exposing the extent of government surveillance by giving thousands of classified documents to journalists.

 

The report was released one day ahead of Friday's opening of director Oliver Stone's film "Snowden."

 

-- © Associated Press 2016-09-16

[Publicus]

 

Three events conflating here.

 

ACLU and Amnesty International call Snowden a hero who deserves a reprieve of some sort.

 

A two-year bipartisan investigation by the House Intelligence Committee is released saying Snowden seriously and extensively harmed US national security and that Snowden was a crank at work and a thief to begin with.

 

The Oliver Stone movie with Snowden's name as the title is released.

 

Right wingers and some others see Snowden as a whistle blower. Most of us see Snowden as a confused guy who revealed serious national security information from the National Security Agency, NSA, to the CCP Chinese while he was in Hong Kong and to Russia since his arrival in Moscow via Wikileaks and Julian Assange.

 

Hang him high.

 

Violations of the Espionage Act do not involve only years in prison. Violations get you decades in prison. There's a reason for that and the most pressing present reason is Edward Snowden.

[JetsetBkk]

2 hours ago, webfact said:

"He claimed to have left Army basic training because of broken legs when in fact he washed out because of shin splints."

 

So he had cracked shin bones and he called them broken legs. That's enough for me; he's obviously a congenital liar who needs decades in jail.

 

Edited September 16, 2016 by JetsetBkk
Spell-check

[thaihome]

17 minutes ago, JetsetBkk said:

 

So he had cracked shin bones and he called them broken legs. That's enough for me; he's obviously a congenital liar who needs decades in jail.

 

 

You just cheery picked one line.

"He claimed to have obtained a high school degree equivalent when in fact he never did. The report said Snowden claimed to have worked for the CIA as a senior adviser, when he was a computer technician.  He also doctored his performance evaluations and obtained new positions at NSA by exaggerating his resume and stealing the answers to an employment test," the report said."

 

TH 

 

 

[craigt3365]

18 minutes ago, thaihome said:

 

You just cheery picked one line.

"He claimed to have obtained a high school degree equivalent when in fact he never did. The report said Snowden claimed to have worked for the CIA as a senior adviser, when he was a computer technician.  He also doctored his performance evaluations and obtained new positions at NSA by exaggerating his resume and stealing the answers to an employment test," the report said."

 

TH

But, but, but....he's a hero!

[Missing Troll]

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

But, but, but....he's a hero!

Hero of what? Not telling the truth?

[humqdpf]

4 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

Three events conflating here.

 

ACLU and Amnesty International call Snowden a hero who deserves a reprieve of some sort.

 

A two-year bipartisan investigation by the House Intelligence Committee is released saying Snowden seriously and extensively harmed US national security and that Snowden was a crank at work and a thief to begin with.

 

The Oliver Stone movie with Snowden's name as the title is released.

 

Right wingers and some others see Snowden as a whistle blower. Most of us see Snowden as a confused guy who revealed serious national security information from the National Security Agency, NSA, to the CCP Chinese while he was in Hong Kong and to Russia since his arrival in Moscow via Wikileaks and Julian Assange.

 

Hang him high.

 

Violations of the Espionage Act do not involve only years in prison. Violations get you decades in prison. There's a reason for that and the most pressing present reason is Edward Snowden.

 

One should be a little bit careful with believing everything that is said about Snowden and the release of information for the following reasons:

- Snowden cannot be charged with espionage as he only published classified information. He never aided a foreign power by providing them in a clandestine way information that would be prejudicial to the national security of the USA. There is no record or credible allegation of him passing any information to the authorities of China or any other foreign power.

- there is a huge amount of classified information in the USA that should not be classified in a transparent democracy

- so much is classified that even Presidents of the USA (and other members of branches of government) have leaked classified information to journalists and no one charges them

- disclosing or publishing classified information is NOT NECESSARILY against the law in the USA. (Congress has continuously refused to make disclosure of classified information a crime). Yes, there are laws against disclosing information that would impact on national security but it would be awful hard to get a jury to agree exactly on what would pass that test in this case

- Yes, there have been prosecutions (including many successful ones) against individuals who have provided classified information to foreign powers against the national security of the USA. But how many have been prosecuted for publishing or handing over classified information to be published (and it indeed was published)? Well, there is no record of such a prosecution (let alone a conviction!), certainly not in recent decades.

[elgordo38]

Sorry buddy I think your a real hero but like here Obama wants to save face. Your toast if you think you will ever be free well maybe in the same time frame as Cuba. 

[stevenl]

3 minutes ago, humqdpf said:

 

One should be a little bit careful with believing everything that is said about Snowden and the release of information for the following reasons:

- Snowden cannot be charged with espionage as he only published classified information. He never aided a foreign power by providing them in a clandestine way information that would be prejudicial to the national security of the USA. There is no record or credible allegation of him passing any information to the authorities of China or any other foreign power.

- there is a huge amount of classified information in the USA that should not be classified in a transparent democracy

- so much is classified that even Presidents of the USA (and other members of branches of government) have leaked classified information to journalists and no one charges them

- disclosing or publishing classified information is NOT NECESSARILY against the law in the USA. (Congress has continuously refused to make disclosure of classified information a crime). Yes, there are laws against disclosing information that would impact on national security but it would be awful hard to get a jury to agree exactly on what would pass that test in this case

- Yes, there have been prosecutions (including many successful ones) against individuals who have provided classified information to foreign powers against the national security of the USA. But how many have been prosecuted for publishing or handing over classified information to be published (and it indeed was published)? Well, there is no record of such a prosecution (let alone a conviction!), certainly not in recent decades.

If that is the case he has nothing to worry about and can return to the USA.

[derator01]

No conspiracy theories, please.

[Srikcir]

6 hours ago, webfact said:

the deputy chairman of the Russian parliament's defense and security committee publicly conceded that "Snowden did share intelligence" with his government.

I guess that makes Snowden a Russian hero.

But if he ever revealed Russian defense and security intelligence,  his hero status would be short-lived as well as himself.

[BuaBS]

Snowdon is a hero .... but he didn't go far enough . Not enough is released . He should have brought more specific data , like personal stuff the nsa has on people . He should have released all the names an personal data of all nsa & cia operatives . He needed to shock the people more . Maximize the damage to the spy agencies.

The world has become a little better because of Snowdon .

The only thing that bothers me is why does he wants to go back to the US. Better and safer in Russia . Trial or no trial , there is a target on his back.

 

Edited September 16, 2016 by BuaBS

[phantomfiddler]

The man would have signed a "Non Disclosure" agreement as a condition of employment, and the low down dirty rat broke that agreement. Shame on him, never to be trusted and deserving every hardship his ratlike disclosures cause to fall on him !

[craigt3365]

29 minutes ago, BuaBS said:

Snowdon is a hero .... but he didn't go far enough . Not enough is released . He should have brought more specific data , like personal stuff the nsa has on people . He should have released all the names an personal data of all nsa & cia operatives . He needed to shock the people more . Maximize the damage to the spy agencies.

The world has become a little better because of Snowdon .

The only thing that bothers me is why does he wants to go back to the US. Better and safer in Russia . Trial or no trial , there is a target on his back.

Every country has spies.  I'd be surprised if anybody was surprised by that.  I doubt he's safer in Russia.  Once they don't need him, he's gone.  Putin has a track record of getting rid of those he doesn't like or need.

[Publicus]

5 hours ago, humqdpf said:

 

One should be a little bit careful with believing everything that is said about Snowden and the release of information for the following reasons:

- Snowden cannot be charged with espionage as he only published classified information. He never aided a foreign power by providing them in a clandestine way information that would be prejudicial to the national security of the USA. There is no record or credible allegation of him passing any information to the authorities of China or any other foreign power.

- there is a huge amount of classified information in the USA that should not be classified in a transparent democracy

- so much is classified that even Presidents of the USA (and other members of branches of government) have leaked classified information to journalists and no one charges them

- disclosing or publishing classified information is NOT NECESSARILY against the law in the USA. (Congress has continuously refused to make disclosure of classified information a crime). Yes, there are laws against disclosing information that would impact on national security but it would be awful hard to get a jury to agree exactly on what would pass that test in this case

- Yes, there have been prosecutions (including many successful ones) against individuals who have provided classified information to foreign powers against the national security of the USA. But how many have been prosecuted for publishing or handing over classified information to be published (and it indeed was published)? Well, there is no record of such a prosecution (let alone a conviction!), certainly not in recent decades.

 

Snowden purloined classified information.   

 

Snowden took illegal possession of US national security documents and information without authorisation or notice. Snowden conveyed classified information to an unauthorized party; he disclosed communications intelligence information. As noted, Snowden unquestionably engaged in the theft of government property. (Would you like to be prosecuted for stealing a paper clip or a nuclear code?)

 

After having gathered all this up against himself, Snowden fled the country clandestinely and with all of it. He went dark in Hong Kong which belongs to the CCP Dictators in Beijing, then Snowden continued on to Moscow (with the aid and assistance of Wikileaks and Julian Assange).

 

The U.S. Government revoked its passport in Snowden's name. So far as I know, Snowden has not revoked his citizenship of the United States (nor can it be taken from him).

 

Guilty as sin itself -- a venial sin by a confused and rotten guy.

[Publicus]

9 hours ago, JetsetBkk said:

 

So he had cracked shin bones and he called them broken legs. That's enough for me; he's obviously a congenital liar who needs decades in jail.

 

 

Snowden starts out with a minimum 30 years at the federal prison at Ft. Leavenworth, Kansas.

 

Then add on to the purloining of national security documents everything he's done and continues to do since against the United States while being aided and comforted by a foreign rival power or two, obviously China but Russia especially and in particular.

 

Wikileaks ushered Snowden from his safehouse in Hong Kong to Moscow and into the waiting arms of Vladimir Putin. Snowden was then issued papers to be in Russia and to remain there. Snowden has managed to give himself a Hobbson's Choice: either effective prison in Russia or a literal prison in the United States. Many of us prefer the latter.

[tonbridgebrit]

Edward Snowden, you did the right thing. Your massive revelations are not just about America, they're about Britain as well. Yes, I want to know what my government is doing. Bearing in mind the principle of "freedom of information" and "the right to know", well, yes, I want that freedom. I want to exercise my right to know.

And this House intelligence committee report, ignore it. You're safe where you are.


You went to Hong Kong, and the people of Hong Kong, they're sensible, they backed and supported YOU.

 

 

[sgtsabai]

I'm shocked, shocked I tell you my post has been washed away by the rain. Damn, I missed the conspiracy posts. Snowden, Manning and all whistle blowers should be completely exonerated and honored. They should be rewarded for revealing the truth. They are hero's and should be treated as such. No, it is not right wingers that see Snowden as a hero, just the opposite along with a few very misguided supposedly liberals. Those that think Snowden is not a hero, along with our other whistle blowers refuse to see the facts. He did his duty. There is no way in hell Snowden could ever receive a fair trial in the US. Just as in Manning's unjust imprisonment, POTUS has declared him guilty.

 

http://time.com/4495221/pardon-edward-snowden/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EBB%20Mil%209.16.16&utm_term=Editorial%20-%20Military%20-%20Early%20Bird%20Brief

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/activists-press-obama-to-pardon-edward-snowden/2016/09/14/56d27c28-7a9d-11e6-ac8e-cf8e0dd91dc7_story.html

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/14/edward-snowden-pardon-bernie-sanders-daniel-ellsberg

 

http://www.alternet.org/print/news-amp-politics/edward-snowden-holds-press-conference-make-his-cases-receiving-presidential-pardon

Edited September 16, 2016 by sgtsabai

[Ulic]

11 hours ago, thaihome said:

 

You just cheery picked one line.

"He claimed to have obtained a high school degree equivalent when in fact he never did. The report said Snowden claimed to have worked for the CIA as a senior adviser, when he was a computer technician.  He also doctored his performance evaluations and obtained new positions at NSA by exaggerating his resume and stealing the answers to an employment test," the report said."

 

TH 

 

 

If he really did all those things and hoodwinked the CIA/NSA I really believe is was suitably

qualified to work for them. I truly mean it, not tongue in cheek. If he was able to fool the

best most secure intelligence agency in the world he was smart, resourceful, and

cunning. An ideal candidate for field work and his talents were wasted as an analyst.

[JetsetBkk]

Interesting that the report came out on Thursday, two days after Joseph Gordon-Levitt was interviewed on the Stephen Colbert show about his role as Snowden in the new film of the same name.

 

Quote Gordon-Levitt: "When he took classified documents and gave them to journalists, that was breaking the law. But the NSA was also breaking the law a millions times every day and lying to the American people about it and we didn't know anything about that until Edward Snowden provided the evidence."

 

<Applause from the audience>

 

[Andaman Al]

7 hours ago, phantomfiddler said:

The man would have signed a "Non Disclosure" agreement as a condition of employment, and the low down dirty rat broke that agreement. Shame on him, never to be trusted and deserving every hardship his ratlike disclosures cause to fall on him !

Did you just watch a James Cagney movie 

Edited September 16, 2016 by Andaman Al

[Publicus]

2 hours ago, Andaman Al said:

Did you just watch a James Cagney movie 

 

Yankee Doodle Dandy which Snowden is not. (If I might presume to speak for the poster you quoted.)

 

The poster you inquire of also said nothing of a grapefruit half to the face. And Snowden would face justice for betrayal rather than a rum runner's execution by another mobster.

 

It just wasn't enough for Snowden to release the NSA files on mobile phone calls by Americans. He had to also take all the national security materials and flee to -- first, CCP China, then to Moscow and into the arms of Vladimir Putin.

 

Snowden took from NSA/CIA both apples and oranges which makes him a rat. Had he taken only apples and fled, then Snowden would be a hero to many for whom he is in fact a villain. No, Snowden had to go sour grapes against his country.

 

Hang him high. 

[Srikcir]

5 hours ago, JetsetBkk said:

But the NSA was also breaking the law

Not really.

The law was vague at best and subject to broad interpretation as to its application to government metadata collection.

 

• While the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that the bulk collection of Americans’ phone metadata by the NSA wasn’t authorized (vs illegal) by section 215 of the Patriot Act,  the ruling didn’t immediately halt the domestic phone records surveillance program either. So while under Section 215 NSA didn't have authorization, Republilcan-controlled Congress has resisted efforts to narrow the authority section 215 metadata collection.
• The court did not address ACLU's argument that metadata collection violated the fourth amendment rights. It held only that the unrestricted gathering of American phone data was beyond the scope of what the US Congress had in mind when it passed section 215 of the Patriot Act after September 11, 2001.
• The court further noted that the ruling notes that phone metadata isn’t owned by the individuals whose privacy is at stake. Instead, it’s held by phone carriers, leaving it open to what’s known as the “third-party doctrine,” the legal argument that Americans don’t have an expectation of privacy for records held by a third party, and thus they don’t have protection under the fourth amendment. The ruling declines to contradict that argument.

[Publicus]

1 hour ago, Srikcir said:

Not really.

The law was vague at best and subject to broad interpretation as to its application to government metadata collection.

 

• While the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ruled that the bulk collection of Americans’ phone metadata by the NSA wasn’t authorized (vs illegal) by section 215 of the Patriot Act,  the ruling didn’t immediately halt the domestic phone records surveillance program either. So while under Section 215 NSA didn't have authorization, Republilcan-controlled Congress has resisted efforts to narrow the authority section 215 metadata collection.
• The court did not address ACLU's argument that metadata collection violated the fourth amendment rights. It held only that the unrestricted gathering of American phone data was beyond the scope of what the US Congress had in mind when it passed section 215 of the Patriot Act after September 11, 2001.
• The court further noted that the ruling notes that phone metadata isn’t owned by the individuals whose privacy is at stake. Instead, it’s held by phone carriers, leaving it open to what’s known as the “third-party doctrine,” the legal argument that Americans don’t have an expectation of privacy for records held by a third party, and thus they don’t have protection under the fourth amendment. The ruling declines to contradict that argument.

 

Don't agree with all the specific holdings of the particular court of appeals, however, the post is highly informative. And in respect of the appellate court, one can be confident the rulings were not without precedent in each body of law cited and applied.

 

Most informative thanks. 

[CaptHaddock]

Odd that none of the law-and-order types here are calling for prosecution of NSA Director Keith Alexander who admitted that he lied grossly and repeatedly to the Congress after Snowden outed the NSA.  No prosecution, no contempt of Congress charge, no loss of pension.  But then he was a big fish and Snowden is a minnow.

[craigt3365]

10 minutes ago, CaptHaddock said:

Odd that none of the law-and-order types here are calling for prosecution of NSA Director Keith Alexander who admitted that he lied grossly and repeatedly to the Congress after Snowden outed the NSA.  No prosecution, no contempt of Congress charge, no loss of pension.  But then he was a big fish and Snowden is a minnow.

Because that's off topic. 

[sgtsabai]

Snowden is a hero and aside from the fact he should have never been charged for serving the American people a pardon would be most fitting. He along with all the other persecuted whistle blowers should be completely exconorated and rewarded for their sacrifice to the American people and the free world, ok what's left of a free world. "The court further noted that the ruling notes that phone metadata isn’t owned by the individuals whose privacy is at stake. Instead, it’s held by phone carriers, leaving it open to what’s known as the “third-party doctrine,” the legal argument that Americans don’t have an expectation of privacy for records held by a third party, and thus they don’t have protection under the fourth amendment. The ruling declines to contradict that argument."  That would mean one would not have any expectancy of privacy, period, because nearly everything involves a 3rd party, including your snail mail. Whether or not the courts in their many differing rulings alow the NSA and the other 3 initial spies to operate under the supposed law, they violate the very spirit of the Constitution. Thanks Edward Snowden.

 

https://www.thenation.com/article/what-should-happen-to-edward-snowden-a-qa-with-his-lawyer/

 

Boy must be raining hard down there in BKK, posts keep getting washed away.

[Srikcir]

3 minutes ago, sgtsabai said:

they violate the very spirit of the Constitution

A spirit is not a law.

My previous post:

• The court did not address ACLU's argument that metadata collection violated the fourth amendment rights. It held only that the unrestricted gathering of American phone data was beyond the scope of what the US Congress had in mind when it passed section 215 of the Patriot Act after September 11, 2001.

 

[tonbridgebrit]

They're trying to say that Snowden is a liar, and that he was some junior member of staff.  That's totally ridiculous and absurd.

Snowden was very senior, and was probably at the centre of the whole system. That's why he was in a position to see and know such a massive amount of stuff. Snowden just wanted America and the world to know what's really going on.

By the way, people have known for ages that GCHQ, in Britain, has been spying on people for ages. Snowden's revelations confirmed it, and revealed the scale of it.

 

[PTC]

14 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

Don't agree with all the specific holdings of the particular court of appeals, however, the post is highly informative. And in respect of the appellate court, one can be confident the rulings were not without precedent in each body of law cited and applied.

 

Most informative thanks. 

 

Here is a link to the decision. It is on the Guardian website. The Guardian has a strong interest in this issue.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/may/07/nsa-bulk-data-collection-surveillance-document

 

The purpose of this 'report' is clearly to lay the groundwork for any future legal or political wrangling over Snowden. With the Court of Appeals ruling the the actions of the NSA were illegal, this then justifies Snowden's status as a whistleblower. However if it is established that most of the material related to non illegal activities, then it makes the case for Snowden's prosecution.

 

Bipartisan or not, the committee represents the intelligence community. It will have long been captured by that community with repeated exultations about national security and how privileged the members are to access 'inside' information and all the blandishments that go with political lobbying. This will not be an objective report and its intention is clear. With clear political brio, the report descends into petty muckraking with its allegations about Snowden's employment record.

 

Oliver Stone has a knack for shaking things up. Good on him. I will watch the movie. I think Joseph Gordon Levitt is one of those talents who come along very rarely. I will probably not draw conclusions from the movie, however it would appear that certain interests in Washington have a lot to fear and a lot to hide. 

 

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes. Have the agencies that were established to protect citizens gone too far and are now preying on them? If this is the case, what can stop this? Perhaps only public outrage and full transparency. The attack dogs are certainly active - Snowden, Assange, Greenwald, Manning.

 

Politically speaking,  do not see Clinton as a force for 'good' in this context. As a demonstrated security 'hawk', she is clearly aligned with the 'establishment' and she has been personally embarrassed by the actions of whistleblowers and 'leakers' through Wikileaks. There are too many people with too strong an interest in the furtherance of the military security industrial complex as it has now become. If nothing else, the little guys like Snowden, Manning and Assange, not matter how flawed their characters, do seem like Davids in the face of the behemoth Goliath of the US multi-trillion dollar security complex. There is something quite heroic to me about this.