Yeah, he could have selectively leaked only important crimes of the US government but he instead leaked tons of shit that endangered the lives of Americans overseas and gave our enemies insight into how we conduct intelligence gathering in hostile countries.
Add that to his shady Russia ties and he's not the hero many make him out to be.
I see your reasoning, but the "wider America" of which you speak - or at least a large portion of it - would still be calling for him to be tossed in prison (or worse) for being a "traitor" after he turned himself in. IOW I don't think it would help him much in the court of public opinion.
Further, the distinction between indiscriminately leaking and selective/targeted leaking is a real one but I don't think it will result in him being spared in any sense. I can't blame him for wanting to prolong media exposure instead of being locked up awaiting trial for "espionage" while the story quickly disappears from the headlines and from the national and global consciousness.
I think he should have kept quiet about leaking the documents. It may be that he never would have been caught and could have kept his freedom. I'm unsure if this would have helped his cause though. Perhaps by coming forward it served to bring further attention to it.
I'm interested to know what you think he could have released that would have allowed him, as you imply, to stay in the "good graces" of the NSA/USA yet provided enough information to the US public that would not have been written off as a crazy person?
He probably could have attempted to only leak the domestic surveillance, or at least screen out as much of the foreign intelligence methods as much as possible.
Half of it was whistleblowing (domestic surveillance) but half of it was pseudo-treasonous (foreign surveillance).
Even if he had no choice, he certainly didn't have to leak everything without the time to go over it. As I pointed out elsewhere in this thread, he's leaked stuff that were completely legal, i.e. the US spying on other countries.
This would be a terrible move for the US as it sets the example that leaking classified information is okay. Whether you believe what he did was right or wrong, he needs to face the consequences of his actions.
Most people don't think his revelations warranted his treason. 7 years later, hardly any policy change has been implemented as a result of his leaks. Ideals aside,americans made a choice between freedom and security. He'll be tried for espionage no matter what. Impossible to grant him clemency without taking on the risk of similar leaks like his.
If the only documents he revealed were the ones that showed the communications of American citizens are being monitored and stayed in the US and defended what he did with some fortitude then maybe he would be viewed as someone who did something patriotic. Instead he fled to Hong Kong and then Russia and revealed many of the NSA's foreign ops (which makes him a traitor).
You're right that there is a certain paradox in what I wrote.
"If he has leaked something of value to America and the world then he should not be punished. But if he has leaked nothing of value then there was no need for it to be secret, and he should not be punished!"
I dunno. At the very least it would be nice to have the evidence out in full before jumping to conclusions.
While I think it's true that he took too many documents and probably released too many documents, I think his intentions were good, and overall was an important contribution to public knowledge of the way our governments work. It was an eye opener for a lot of tech companies, to be sure.
He was essentially forced to flee to Russia-- no other country could protect him. I don't think it's where he wanted to end up.
I don't think he should be pardoned. He committed crimes, and possibly could have found a better way to get this information out there. I do think he should be offered a generous plea-bargain in return for coming home and debriefing the NSA/CIA and congress about what exactly he took, how he took it and the status of all of those secrets.
He did actually have that option. If he had merely stolen and leaked information about two or three blatantly unconstitutional programs, which surely would have been very simple, I doubt quite so many people would be calling him a traitor. I certainly wouldn't.
This might've worked if they'd offered him full clemency the same day the leaks started coming out. The handling of his case shows that capturing and punishing him was far more important to the administration than any concerns about national security.
I suppose that with the wikileaks precedent, he would assume they would have thrown him in solitary confinement, with no access to the press, which would defeat the purpose of his leaking the info.
reply