Ed Snowden wants to return to the US.

[AuH20]

I think his lawyer is trying to paint Ed as a guy that still loves good 'ole USA.

Saying he wants to come back is showing that he loves the country and he's not a Russia commie loving traitor bastard. The way the some are portraying him.


The fact that he's stayed with his American GF, and has rejected dates with Russian girls, sounds silly to me, until I realize it's part of the whole, "Hey, I love America. I love American women! I love my country! I'm USA through and through! I'm ready to come back if I can get a fair trial!"


I think it's more a PR/Image thing.

Of course, he does. Who else would stick their neck out in such a fashion? A lover of his country. That's who.

 

[Mani]

Of course, he does. Who else would stick their neck out in such a fashion? A lover of his country. That's who.

That goes without saying, but there has been a lot of backlash of people calling him a sellout to Putin, a commie bastard (even though russia is not communist), etc.

He need to be seen not as a traitor or Russia lover, but as a patriot. Not just in our eyes, but in the eyes of the public.

 

[The Gold Standard]

He need to be seen not as a traitor or Russia lover, but as a patriot. Not just in our eyes, but in the eyes of the public.

You are dramatically overestimating "the public". If their TV told them to, they would fly to Russia and bring back Snowden's head on a plate. Anything that pleases their masters, pleases Boobus.

 

[Zippyjuan]

May, 2014: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...d-like-to-return-home-but-not-to-a-jail-cell/

Edward Snowden: ‘I’d like to go home’

Edward J. Snowden, in an hour-long television interview broadcast Wednesday night, portrayed himself as a “patriot” who broke the law in an act of “civil disobedience” directed at “massive” constitutional violations by the U.S. government.

While Snowden said he would love to return to the United States from Russia, where he sought and obtained asylum last summer after leaking thousands of documents detailing the extent of the National Security Agency’s sprawling surveillance program, he said he did not want to “walk into a jail cell.”

That, he said, would serve as a “bad example for other people in government who see something happening, some violation of the Constitution, and think they need to say something about it.”

 

[The Gold Standard]

I would vote for the fucking guy for president. But he is dead as soon as he is within range of a CIA weapon.

 

[Mani]

You are dramatically overestimating "the public". If their TV told them to, they would fly to Russia and bring back Snowden's head on a plate. Anything that pleases their masters, pleases Boobus.

You do have a point.

 

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

Gamesmanship. He ain't comin' back here.

 

[Christian Liberty]

This thread is a testament to the uselessness of constitutionalism.

(He already IS guaranteed a fair trial.)

Surprise: Pieces of paper don't magically guarantee compliance with what is written on them. Pieces of paper can be ignored if people want to ignore them. They do that with the Bible and the Bible was breathed by God Himself. Does it surprise you that they'd do it with the constitution?

 

[AngryCanadian]

If he does come back. Just wait till he does then all the bad news about Russia would be over, this is a trap to get him.

 

[The Free Hornet]

My guess, TPTB do not want a trial and don't want a martyr or a political prisoner. Call their bluff, Ed! Is there a kickstarter for his legal defense fund? I've never kickstarted even a motorbike but I'd jump on this.

 

[Czolgosz]

Don't fucking do it Ed, unless you want to live the rest of your life in prison for some strange reason.

123

 

[Mani]

Surprise: Pieces of paper don't magically guarantee compliance with what is written on them. Pieces of paper can be ignored if people want to ignore them. They do that with the Bible and the Bible was breathed by God Himself. Does it surprise you that they'd do it with the constitution?

This is what our leaders think of our beloved constitution:

We are just peasants, and the constitution is just a piece of paper...

 

[muh_roads]

"A jury of your peers" involves people that were too dumb to get out of jury duty.

Stay in Russia, Edward.

 

[NoOneButPaul]

I have no idea why he would be so stupid...

Consider the following Ed...

http://anonhq.com/cia-whistleblower-faces-100-years-in-jail-why-isnt-the-president-protecting-him/

When the US president Barack Obama signed the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act into law on November 27, 2012, he was applauded for strengthening and expanding already existing protections for whistleblowers. Presidential Policy Directive 19 extended whistleblower protections to national security and intelligence employees. However, despite his promise to protect whistleblowers from prosecution and wrongful imprisonment, he has had a bad track record in putting his words and the law into practice.

Of some 2,900 cases involving the government in the year 2013, at least 1,400 had something to do with retaliation against whistleblowers. Even 47 of Obama’s own 73 inspectors general wrote to Congress complaining about his administration’s refusal to be transparent and open.

The White House is doing more than any other administration ever to block the very transparency Obama promised – eight whistleblowers have been prosecuted under Obama, more than under all other presidents combined. He has sentenced whistleblowers to 10 times (526 months of prison time for national security leakers) the jail time of all previous US presidents combined.

The latest example is of Jeffrey Sterling.

Former CIA case officer Jeffrey Sterling, a national security whistleblower, faces 100 years in prison and a fine of up to $2.25 million for leaking information about Operation Merlin, a CIA mission to supply Iran with flawed blueprints for its nuclear program, to New York Times journalist James Risen. The government couldn’t prove Sterling’s guilt as James never named his source and there was no evidence of recorded phone conversations or captured email exchanges between him and Risen. Still, he was found guilty of nine counts of violating the Espionage Act meant to penalize spies.

Jeffrey Sterling didn’t hurt anyone, he didn’t commit any crime that violates federal laws, he was convicted without evidence, and he is being punished for ‘apparently leaking’ the truth everyone is entitled to know. He is innocent. Will you protect him Mr President? Are you for whistleblowers or against? We need to know…

 

[AuH20]

I have no idea why he would be so stupid...

Consider the following Ed...

http://anonhq.com/cia-whistleblower-faces-100-years-in-jail-why-isnt-the-president-protecting-him/

When the US president Barack Obama signed the Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act into law on November 27, 2012, he was applauded for strengthening and expanding already existing protections for whistleblowers. Presidential Policy Directive 19 extended whistleblower protections to national security and intelligence employees. However, despite his promise to protect whistleblowers from prosecution and wrongful imprisonment, he has had a bad track record in putting his words and the law into practice.

Of some 2,900 cases involving the government in the year 2013, at least 1,400 had something to do with retaliation against whistleblowers. Even 47 of Obama’s own 73 inspectors general wrote to Congress complaining about his administration’s refusal to be transparent and open.

The White House is doing more than any other administration ever to block the very transparency Obama promised – eight whistleblowers have been prosecuted under Obama, more than under all other presidents combined. He has sentenced whistleblowers to 10 times (526 months of prison time for national security leakers) the jail time of all previous US presidents combined.

The latest example is of Jeffrey Sterling.

Former CIA case officer Jeffrey Sterling, a national security whistleblower, faces 100 years in prison and a fine of up to $2.25 million for leaking information about Operation Merlin, a CIA mission to supply Iran with flawed blueprints for its nuclear program, to New York Times journalist James Risen. The government couldn’t prove Sterling’s guilt as James never named his source and there was no evidence of recorded phone conversations or captured email exchanges between him and Risen. Still, he was found guilty of nine counts of violating the Espionage Act meant to penalize spies.

Jeffrey Sterling didn’t hurt anyone, he didn’t commit any crime that violates federal laws, he was convicted without evidence, and he is being punished for ‘apparently leaking’ the truth everyone is entitled to know. He is innocent. Will you protect him Mr President? Are you for whistleblowers or against? We need to know…

Woodrow Wilson still tortures us from the grave!!!

 

[pcosmar]

Fair Trial??

No such thing anymore.

Don't even think of coming back Ed. (beyond any wishful fantasy that is quickly dismissed as such)

Not unless all charges are dropped and you return to be rewarded with some honor for your service. (another wishful fantasy)

 

[surf]

on a side note, I noticed on the Faux "news" ticker that they refer to his lawyer as having "Kremlin ties"

pathetic

 

[jllundqu]

Move to a place where you can be free of the BS we have here, Ed. The (former) United States is not worthy of your sacrifice. Keep dropping truth bombs and don't ever think about turning back. You of all people know what would happen to you once the US Gov got it's filthy hands on you. Fair trial my ass.

 

[Marenco]

If he thinks he's gonna get a good & fair trial in this Plutocracy that we have, he's got another coming.

 

[tod evans]

Anatoly Kucherena told a news conference Tuesday that he has teamed up with U.S. and German lawyers

This is a problem, RUN!