Rand Paul Explains Why He Would Not Pardon Edward Snowden

[HVACTech]

Sorry. Rand's basically saying that without a trial he is passing judgement. No thanks. I don't want that from the head of the executive branch.

that s nice and VERY purist of you.

you are a closet Trump supporter?

 

[phill4paul]

i think the reason the knee-jerk to rand's response is we all tend to think "treason and death penalty"...but Rand has already said neither of those should apply.

Naw, I think..."I think the best compromise on it is that there would be some penalty" and "And I think he would actually serve some sentence, if it were reasonable and negotiated." That's pretty cut and dry. If this is is stance then it differs from mine.

 

[phill4paul]

that s nice and VERY purist of you.

you are a closet Trump supporter?

Yup, you got me pegged. What's your view?

 

[HVACTech]

Yup, you got me pegged. What's your view?

well, I stand with Rand. duh.

"Naw, I think..."I think the best compromise on it is that there would be some penalty" and "And I think he would actually serve some sentence, if it were reasonable and negotiated." That's pretty cut and dry. If this is is stance then it differs from mine.

how so?

 

[erowe1]

Not the answer that encourages me to send money to him. Or become a streetwalker.

I'd have liked..."I encourage Edward Snowden to return to the U.S. and stand trial. I would like nothing more than that in this case. Only if I were the president of the U.S. I wouldn't wish it under the Obama administration, the current administration that prosecutes harshly those who only want to expose the truth.
"

So if Rand said that, you'd become a street walker?

 

[phill4paul]

well, I stand with Rand. duh.

"Naw, I think..."I think the best compromise on it is that there would be some penalty" and "And I think he would actually serve some sentence, if it were reasonable and negotiated." That's pretty cut and dry. If this is is stance then it differs from mine.

how so?

Well, my stance would be...

As there is ample accusations against Edward Snowden there is nothing more that I would rather see than Mr. Snowden returned to America and, by doing so, face a trial by his peers. I would do this as the head of the executive branch. As far as whether or not I would pardon Mr. Snowden that would depend on his trial and what was brought to light.

 

[Foreigner]

Snowden isn't claiming he is innocent. He has leaked secrets. He'd take some months in prison over staying the rest of his life in Russian exile.

He's not returning to the US because he could face the death penalty or life. In a military secret court. Now THAT's what's wrong, not Rand's position.

He recently won a prestigious Norwegian award, but couldn't come to pick it up because the government here would have arrested him and sent him to the US. Only Russia is strong enough to stand up to the pressure of the US. Too bad they have a much worse security apparatus than the US, no real rule of law, and much less freedom.

Edit: (Snowden, 1 month ago)
"I honestly never expected to be free today; I expected to be in prison. I didn't expect to get awards; I expected my reputation to be ruined, because a number of incredibly powerful officials around the world were personally embarrassed because of these revelations," Snowden said.

 

[HVACTech]

Well, my stance would be...

As there is ample accusations against Edward Snowden there is nothing more that I would rather see than Mr. Snowden returned to America and, by doing so, face a trial by his peers. I would do this as the head of the executive branch. As far as whether or not I would pardon Mr. Snowden that would depend on his trial and what was brought to light.

I see.
well. that is CERTAINLY miles and Miles away from Rands position on the matter.

 

[HVACTech]

Snowden isn't claiming he is innocent. He has leaked secrets. He'd take some months in prison over staying the rest of his life in Russian exile.

He's not returning to the US because he could face the death penalty or life. In a military secret court. Now THAT's what's wrong, not Rand's position.

He recently won a prestigious Norwegian award, but couldn't come to pick it up because the government here would have arrested him and sent him to the US. Only Russia is strong enough to stand up to the pressure of the US. Too bad they have a much worse security apparatus than the US, no real rule of law, and much less freedom.

on paper, I do not see much difference between the US Republic and Russia's Republic.

what does the "rule of Law" mean to you? (honest question)

in my country, I endorse rolling back the "rule of Law" to the 12th amendment.
the 1791 Constitution was sublime.

 

[Foreigner]

on paper, I do not see much difference between the US Republic and Russia's Republic.

what does the "rule of Law" mean to you? (honest question)

in my country, I endorse rolling back the "rule of Law" to the 12th amendment.
the 1791 Constitution was sublime.

On paper, in it's constitution, even China has fair and speedy trials, commitment to democracy, freedom of speech...

Rule of law to me means separation of powers, freedom of speech and an impartial judiciary system where you are innocent until proven guilty. A few well managed democracies have them. Maybe even the odd autocratic state too. Anyhow, the stronger the national government is, the more like they are to "bend" rulings to their favor.

The US has hands down the best constitution of any nation. Sadly it's not managed well.

Here in Norway the constitution is changed every few years... There is no respect for it, few know what's in it even. Maybe not so weird, because the original had things like "People who are landowners or are rich have the right to vote", "Jews and gypsies are not to be granted access to the country". It still has "The King is Holy, and can never be charged for a criminal act. Criticism of him can be punished with jail" in it.

 

[HVACTech]

On paper, in it's constitution, even China has fair and speedy trials, commitment to democracy, freedom of speech...

Rule of law to me means separation of powers, freedom of speech and an impartial judiciary system where you are innocent until proven guilty. A few well managed democracies have them. Maybe even the odd autocratic state too. Anyhow, the stronger the national government is, the more like they are to "bend" rulings to their favor.

The US has hands down the best constitution of any nation. Sadly it's not managed well.

Here in Norway the constitution is changed every few years... There is no respect for it, few know what's in it even. Maybe not so weird, because the original had things like "People who are landowners or are rich have the right to vote", "Jews and gypsies are not to be granted access to the country". It still has "The King is Holy, and can never be charged for a criminal act. Criticism of him can be punished with jail" in it.

Ha! now we are talking.
yes! I agree. here is the way that I see it.
the Greeks invented "Democracy" BEFORE the Romans invented the Republic.
all the 1st Roman empire did, was to place "rules" on a "democracy"
one simply CANNOT allow the "people" to vote on just anything.
the founders of my country wrote extensively about this.

I thank you for spreading the word and assisting us in our cause for Liberty.

just to be clear.
in my view there were 3 Roman empires.
all separate and distinct. (within reason)

 

[Krugminator2]

on paper, I do not see much difference between the US Republic and Russia's Republic.

Even though the differences are almost imperceptible to the naked eye (besides the brown Sochi drinking water, extreme poverty, the rule by the Russia mafia and a former Soviet KGB agent as a leader), it is best to see if the data shows any differences.

United States #12
Greece #130

Russia #143
http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking


I think it is pretty safe to say there are some differences in the way the countries are set up and the law is administered.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Rand is right. A republic is a nation of laws, and laws that are allowed to be broken by a few are not laws. I think the unspoken message here is that the government is also in the wrong but that's another story for another day. If Edward Snowden himself has been willing to accept some punishment as Rand suggested then how could anyone who supports Snowden actually disagree with Rand? They just said the same thing ....

A moral man cannot be blamed or held in contempt for ignoring or violating immoral laws. Snowden had the terrible choice of doing the right thing or the legal thing. I'm glad he chose the right thing.

 

[HVACTech]

Even though the differences are almost imperceptible to the naked eye (besides the brown Sochi drinking water, extreme poverty, the rule by the Russia mafia and a former Soviet KGB agent as a leader), it is best to see if the data shows any differences.

United States #12
Greece #130

Russia #143
http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking


I think it is pretty safe to say there are some differences in the way the countries are set up and the law is administered.

uh, "on paper" has to do with.. design structure. design parameters.

I am a firm supporter of the "original intent" of our Founders.

(cue AF to give some shit about the evils of "Federations")..

 

[specsaregood]

It is tough to find room to find fault here when Randal is saying the exact same thing as Snowden.

 

[HVACTech]

A moral man cannot be blamed or held in contempt for ignoring or violating immoral laws. Snowden had the terrible choice of doing the right thing or the legal thing. I'm glad he chose the right thing.

do you know what the word "Caucasian" references?
and what the HELL does THAT have to do with Russia!

bydammit!

 

[HVACTech]

It is tough to find room to find fault here when Randal is saying the exact same thing as Snowden.

+rep

 

[JohnGalt23g]

I agree there is some "playing the game" going on, but it is hard to decipher it all, all the time. And Snowden is a hero, plain and simple.

Even heroes have to do time occasionally. King did. Gandhi did.

When doing civil disobedience, it is par for the course...

 

[Foreigner]

Even heroes have to do time occasionally. King did. Gandhi did.

When doing civil disobedience, it is par for the course...

And they were proud of serving their time! That Snowden did something illegal, but FOR the greater good and against corrupt injustice is exactly why he's a hero.

It would have been a lesser act of heroism if it was legal and somehow the NSA and CIA were okay with him whistleblowing.

The only reason he escaped is the draconian punishment they would have put on him, as evidenced by what they gave Manning for leaking secrets to Wikileaks. And that's fine. I can't think of any cause I would martyr myself for.

 

[HVACTech]

And they were proud of serving their time! That Snowden did something illegal, but FOR the greater good and against corrupt injustice is exactly why he's a hero.

It would have been a lesser act of heroism if it was legal and somehow the NSA and CIA were okay with him whistleblowing.

The only reason he escaped is the draconian punishment they would have put on him, as evidenced by what they gave Manning for leaking secrets to Wikileaks. And that's fine. I can't think of any cause I would martyr myself for.

Liberty is ALWAYS a worthwhile cause.

"you must spread some reputation around before giving it to foreigner again"

surely I can get some help on this one!