1) I doubt you fully comprehend what the NSA did and is doing as you use the phrase "spying on Americans under his watch." Nothing the Administration or any member of the Intelligence Community has done is against the law and in fact is explicitly supported by legislation. Second, Snowden didn't just leak the details of the NSA's metadata collection he released classified cables regarding various intelligence efforts including foreign policy negotiations with other nations and intelligence efforts and assessments regarding hostile foreign nations. Information such as that is nothing with which the public has any right to know.
Also, I have no idea where you get this notion that Obama wishes to put him in some "dark hole." First, Snowden fled the country to avoid any potential indictments and as of yet we have no idea if he has been indicted of any charges. Second, he broke the law and going through the legal system is far from "putting him in a dark hole."
2) Again, Bernie has been intentionally vague on what he would do with regards to Syria. Hilary is at least able to lay out a specific plan.
Saying something is okay because "legal reasons" is not a good argument. It is what it is, and you trying to explain it away like it is okay because they abused their power on hysteria and paranoia is wrong. Something, something "terror" something we have to keep americans save from an enemy that doesn't exist.
What is so sad, is that this is a nationalistic knee-jerkreaction to a government going beyond its bounds to control its populace. And it always runs on fear, and keeping the stupid public in the dark, because they are too stupid. You can trace that behavior to many world powers in some form, and they all have nationalists who defend the governments excessive use of force and invasion of privacy be it in the US, China, Russia or elsewhere.
Snowden released the documents to whistleblowers, who exposed illegal and invasive surveillance that were unknown to the public all over the world. Of those, many of violated international law including;
XKeyscore, a program which tags people they spy on with user metrics to flag certain data, such as race, sex, ethnicity, and geolocation;
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/nsa-top-secret-program-online-data
Mass Data collection by the NSA and GCHQ (britains SS) under the program called prism;
https://www.washingtonpost.com/inve...0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html
Created malware protocols all over the world with the aim of reducing security having spend billions on it;
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/06/us/nsa-foils-much-internet-encryption.html?hp&_r=1
And they have infected more than 50,000 computers will malware (possible more);
http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2013/11/23/nsa-infected-50000-computer-networks-with-malicious-software
Engaged in the spying of 35 world leaders including crucial allies;
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/24/nsa-surveillance-world-leaders-calls
For exposing these programs and human rights violations, he has been called a traitor. Summing this up behind the advocacy that "the public doesn't have a right to know" is wrong. NSA engaged in largest and most nafarious data collecting of any government, in secret, and without a clear basis, using the war on terror as an afront on the invasion of privacy.
With regards to the Snowden being put in a black hole, it might have something to do with Bradley Manning, who exposed mass murder of civilians in iraq by apache helicopter, torture of guantanamo detainees, and other international violations.
For his exposure, they tried to pin on him that he aided the enemy, which would have yielded multiple life sentences. For exposing corruption that would have remained hidden in the chain of command.
As a deterrent for others to leak similar information, he is now servign a 35 year sentence- 3½ of which he spend on solitary confinement, which- I hope you know, the UN has condemned as torture (
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=40097 ). A fucked up practice that the US have continued to engage in, and which aptly shows how backwards and fucked up its justice system is.
Nobody will know if Snowden would receive the same punishment, but it is idiotic to sweep aside the idea under "conspiracy theories" that the consequences for what he has done, will not be consequential.
The guy is obviously a hero for uncovering one of the most imperialistic and vile acts of the United States during the 21th century.
And btw, as for the whole "Snowden caused insufferable damage" I challenge you to find anything that has been released from his documents that put US security at risk or its agents at risk. It's hogwash. You're not going to find anything, as have been noted by many political commentators.
The largest thing you have on Snowden besides exposing the government paranoia and desire for control, is some of the cases that does have security concerns, as said by Chomsky;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvwxYb4RCAA
Oh please.
Again, you and others keep stating these programs were against the law or unconstitutional and yet cite not one single source despite the fact that they were routinely upheld by the courts. In fact, you seem to discount the entire situation that occurred within the Bush Administration regarding the NSA's collection activities that nearly resulted in the resignation of the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, and the Director of the FBI.
This occurred in 2004 when the Bush administration was seeking to recertify the NSA program in its current form, the program had to be continually reauthorized in order to be permissible. The problem was that lawyers within the DOJ had serious concerns with regards to certain elements of the program and refused to sign off on it. The confrontation went up to the eleventh hour with Bush officials trying to pressure the DOJ to sign off on the program. Things get interesting because the AG at the time, John Ashcroft, was hospitalized after undergoing a procedure and Bush officials including Alberto Gonzales and Andrew Card went to the hospital to basically convince the bed stricken Ashcroft to sign off. However, James Comey, Deputy AG and others learned about this and rushed to the hospital to ensure that they didn't try to unduly pressure Ashcroft.
While at the hospital Ashcroft basically told the Bush officials that Comey was the Deputy AG and in charge at the moment. As a result, they had to go back home with nothing. What is surprising about this whole incident is that George W. Bush, the President, was apparently in the dark about his entire legal controversy. It was all being pushed for by Cheney and other officials. Comey basically went to Bush preparing to resign until Bush was basically like, "what the fuck is going?" Comey explained, baffled that he wasn't appraised of this whole dispute, and Bush told him to make whatever changes were necessary to make the program in compliance with the laws. He did so and the program continued in its amended form.
The whole dispute between DOJ and White House Officials specifically Cheney is what led to extremely strained relations between Bush and Cheney during his second term. Cheney basically took things right up the edge of the cliff, again to the point that several senior officials were preparing to resign, all without ever checking with the President.
But yeah, they are all operating like thugs with no regard for the laws...
Source:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/16/washington/16nsa.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/us/politics/george-w-bush-made-retroactive-nsa-fix-after-hospital-room-showdown.html
The guy drafted the bill says it was an abuse of power ;
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2015/06/02/author-of-original-patriot-act-n2006936
The fact that they were upheld in court shows what a disaster shitshow mainstream American politics is. I don't know how you can have this position of explaining abuse of power- by the NSA, which in MANY instances have violated international law with its spy programs.
NSA Violating international law;
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...rnational_law_david_kaye_s_report_to_the.html
NSA Violates human rights standards;
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/...e-how-nsa-violates-international-human-rights
Sanders voted against against the program (
https://votesmart.org/bill/votes/8289 ) in 2001, and against it at every renwel. AFAIK Hillary voted for it, at every turn.
Again, citing something as constitutional or as "it was within the limits of the law" is not a shield from the morally corrupt actions of those who engaged in it and supported it.
People have a damn good reason to be upset and holla at the politicians who let it get this far.
And let me be clear- I'm not advocating that people do not vote for Hillary Clinton against Trump or Cruz. You absolutely should vote for the candidate who is not going to mass deport or carpet bomb enmass.
But it really irks me to read this historical revisionism, like these things are no big deal and like Hillary, and other democrats who supported this terrible laws, should just be swept under the rug.
It should be remembered, and accurately represented, even if she is the candidate that everyone has to vote for.
In my mind, this is when political affiliation is at its worst. When you will not call out your own party for what it has done. We absolutely should, but I get this urging sense of Hillary apolgatism and everything is leaked emails and benghazi. No, FFS. Look at her voting record.
If anything she should be held up on it, so when she gets to office she will strive to not make the same mistakes and be more like she was, before she was a senator.
