Greenwald: I Didn’t Even Know Snowden’s Name Until He Was In Hong Kong

[ProSense]

Greenwald: I Didn’t Even Know Snowden’s Name Until He Was In Hong Kong

Glenn Greenwald, one of the reporters to whom Edward Snowden leaked classified National Security Agency documents, said Monday that he did not even know "where Mr. Snowden worked or what his name was until he was in Hong Kong with the documents."

On CNN's "The Lead With Jake Tapper," Tapper brought up the case of Fox News reporter James Rosen, who was investigated by the Justice Department for his role in receiving sensitive information from a government source. Tapper asked the Guardian reporter if he advised Snowden on how to transfer the documents or did anything similar to Rosen.

"Not only did I not do more than Mr. Rosen was accused of doing by the Justice Department when he was called a co-conspirator, I did much, much less," Greenwald said. "I didn't even know where Mr. Snowden worked or what his name was until after he was in Hong Kong with the documents. We had some preliminary communication with him about how to communicate secretly in a way that would be secure. But other than that, nothing."

Watch the exchange below:

<...>

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/greenwald-i-didnt-know-what-snowden-did-until

Huh. Greenwald said he's been working with Snowden since February. He's been at BAH since March
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022984574

The problem with defending Snowden.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023083768

[JI7]

1. i almost feel sorry for him

"almost"

[flamingdem]

2. Wonder if the Ecuadoran Embassy in Brazil

is more or less comfortable than those in Moscow and London

[Cali_Democrat]

3. Oh boy. It's begining to fall apart for Greenwald.

I have no doubt the justice department will now examine Mr. Greenwald very very closely.

And they should.

How long before we see Greenwald feeling to China and Russia?

[Cha]

25. And, who would take his Tweets seriously

now? Oh, nevermind..

[BehindTheCurtain76]

43. what!?!?

Wow you guys are waaaaaay out there...Greenwald speaks the truth regardless if it's his Democratic Party in power or not. You make me feel ashamed for MY Democratic Party of which I have campaigned for since 1985...you are all acting like the Bush followers with their blinders on. This is way beyond Obama and when you say nothing is Obama's fault because he's up against so much power then you better extend that gratuity to a journalist like Glenn who is up against much more including the myopic reactions of his fellow countrymen...I sincerely do not understand those who are smearing him...makes me wonder if it's Republicans because I have news for you...Republicans are not supporting Snowden in an effort to make Obama look bad...they are way to married to the military industrial/surveillance/policestate complex than to ever go along with a truthteller like Snowden or Greenwald. Electing Obama didn't change anything as evidenced by the evidence and Im truly sorry for that but Im not an ostrich with my head in the sand....if you read Snowdens interviews you would see that he wanted to come out under Bush but hesitated because he like all of us figured Obama would end these practices as promised...he got disillusioned after a few years of seeing that we have basically a Bush 4th term in his eyes so he came out now. I remember when hardcore Republican loonies finally gave up on Bush because they couldn't ignore Katrina, Iraq, the Financial Meltdown etc but there were always a few staunch defenders left because no one wants to admit the failure of 'their guy'. I am a Progressive now and I support guys like Russ Feingold, Alan Greyson, Michael Moore et....keep the faith and let the truth shine because as Orwell said, "When we live in a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." Peace.

[sheshe2]

58. Really

Then~

Huh. Greenwald said he's been working with Snowden since February. He's been at BAH since March
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022984574

And now~

This is the OP you just posted to.

Greenwald: I Didn’t Even Know Snowden’s Name Until He Was In Hong Kong
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023085699

And your quote:

I am a Progressive now and I support guys like Russ Feingold, Alan Greyson, Michael Moore et....keep the faith and let the truth shine because as Orwell said, "When we live in a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." Peace.

IMHO you might want to read the Op and Links that are posted before you respond. Your quote says you value truth and disdain deceit. Sure doesn't sound like Greenwald has been truthful.

[BehindTheCurtain76]

87. read closely

He never says he knew his name...just that he had been in contact with him...its very possible that Snowden didnt reveal his identity.

[sheshe2]

34. Oh what a tangled web we weave

when first we practice to deceive~

[Civilization2]

50. You are a fool,. a reporter should flee your government? Are you a corporate thug?

What is it you are advocating? Total corporate control, and zero free speech?

"justice department will now examine Mr. Greenwald very very closely"

for what exactly? reporting the truth about how the government lies and has overstepped its mandate?

Sheesh,. what asshattery.

[Cha]

77. No, "you are a fool".

[still_one]

4. Sounds like he is looking to distance himself from Snowden

[Tx4obama]

5. K&R n/t

[Octafish]

6. Keep after him, ProSense! Destroy! Kill! Kill!

Greenwald stands for freedom of the press.

Glenn Greenwald vs. Cass Sunstein - Battle Royal, in their own words!

So, what you stand for must be something else.

[grasswire]

10. I'm becoming aware of many DU-ers I would not want on my "team"

Nietzsche: Beware those in whom the urge to punish is strong.

Indeed.

[BumRushDaShow]

22. Nothing to do with punish

and everything to do with dismissing bullshit reporters who manage to take a very serious and valid issue regarding domestic spying and creating a tabloid circus out of it.

[ucrdem]

11. What GG stands for:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002101211

Not pretty.

[Octafish]

15. Wow. Remember to use it against him when they tie him to the stake.

Still rather be there in the flames with Greenwald than sipping a mai tai with this guy:

Cass Sunstein.

[ucrdem]

20. Sunstein left the Obama admin last year and burning at the stake

is only permitted in Texas.

[Luminous Animal]

47. There are claims in that post that the OP refuses to provide evidence.

[Octafish]

59. It gets obvious...

...the agents of the state-us quo, organized and out in force.

Greenwald stood up to Bush when Corporate McPravda and almost all the "leftist" reporters were AWOL. And he still stands against secret government, especially its more corrupt agencies.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021255207

His critics are either making a mistake or don't know what they're talking about.

[Scurrilous]

13. "Faster, ProSense. Kill! Kill!"

[flamingdem]

17. Good reference

Russ Meyers the genius

[Sheepshank]

28. Just how much freedom of the press?

The freedom for the Murdoch group to tap the phones of people? How about listening to voice mail messages on a dead girls phone? How about generating and publishing bogus polls to direct elections. How about twisting and ommitting truths in story telling to manipulate a story?

The noble cause of the press isn't really all that noble, unbiased and without leading the public in a 'paid' direction. At least not in my books.

[ucrdem]

7. I love the smell of backpedaling in the morning.

[CakeGrrl]

8. Bullshit. Anyone have his tweet bragging that he talked to him in February?

Lies will eventually catch up.

[Cali_Democrat]

9. YES!

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/344040301972815872

[Tx4obama]

14. WOW Greenwald has cooked his own goose! :) n/t

[flamingdem]

18. I just made a screengrab

though I'm sure it won't be needed

[Kahuna]

39. so did I...

[Demit]

27. Greenwald doesn't mention his name in that tweet.

All he is saying here is that he didn't know Snowden's name. His name. It is quite conceivable that Snowden was using a pseudonym while they were communicating, and that Greenwald was aware of that and was agreeable to it. This is not the bombshell that the OP thinks it is.

[Historic NY]

63. Bombshell......... Greenwald adds sauce to his own cooked goose...

if he was working with Snowden before his employment Booz Allen Hamilton.

At the time of his departure from the US in May 2013, he had been working for consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton for less than three months as a system administrator inside the NSA at the Kunia Regional SIGINT Operations Center in Hawaii.

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/edward-snowden-nsa-leaker-glenn-greenwald-barton-gellman-92505.html#ixzz2VrPnKjNf

Its beginning to look like this was engineered....time will tell.

[Cha]

23. Oh, I already posted downthread but you asked, Cake..

http://theobamadiary.com/2013/06/24/chat-away-questions/#comments

Oh, and btw.. that's "the reality".

[flamingdem]

35. On the twitter thread it says that Greenwald deleted this post!

The very last in the conversation says "is this the post you deleted? We found it"

People are so considerate sometimes!

[Whisp]

37. LOL! he pulled a Wiener.

the smite button didn't work so good for Anthony either.

[flamingdem]

38. snort!

he revealed a bit too much with that tweet

[Hissyspit]

41. If he deleted it, why did I just find it in his feed?

[Luminous Animal]

44. Except for the fact that it is a big giant fucking lie...

Here is the tweet that has never been deleted. https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/344040301972815872

[joshcryer]

91. I don't see it in his actual feed.

I don't know how twitter works exactly but why would it not be in his feed?

Yes, I understand the link is still there, and active, but if you scroll down in his feed around June 10 his response to that guy isn't there:

emptywheel @emptywheel 10 Jun

Apparently @ggreenwald is so powerful he's in charge of hiring for Booz. Pretty stunning. For a loner, I mean.
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
Expand
Salon.com @Salon 10 Jun

.@ggreenwald exposed a shadowy world of private contractors and spying. Here are all its key players (via @TimothyS) http://slnm.us/wG0kjEu
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
Expand
Steve Pearce @steven_pearce 10 Jun

@ggreenwald responds to lies about him (jan '13 article). Interesting read, like is honesty on his personal evolution http://m.dailykos.com/story/2013/01/30/1182442/-Glenn-Greenwald-Responds-to-Widespread-Lies-About-Him-on-Cato-Iraq-War-and-more …
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
Expand
Kebabi Kebabi @k_kebabi 10 Jun

@ggreenwald Sullivan: "He could have even gone to a member of Congress who wasn’t briefed and gotten him or her involved."

HA HA HA
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
View conversation
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald 10 Jun

Completely figures that Andrew Sullivan is channeling this moronic conspiracy theory - HE WORKED AT NSA SINCE 2009!!! http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2013/06/10/enter-the-media-martyr/ …
Expand
Tom Belknap @dragonflyeye 10 Jun

Must say: pretty disappointed with former Lefty warriors against Bush Admin surveillance lining up to defend Obama Admin surveillance.
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
Expand
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald 10 Jun

Yes, Snowden only worked at Booz Allen for a few months - but has been working w/NSA since 2009, w/other companies, including Dell
Expand
Kevin Wagner @truthaddict83 10 Jun

.@ggreenwald If Obama and the NSA haven't done anything wrong, what do they have to hide?
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
View conversation
Kerry Lauerman @kerrylauerman 10 Jun

Wow. RT @DanielEllsberg: There has not been in American history a more important leak than Snowden's http://ow.ly/lSrjM
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
View summary
Cenk Uygur @cenkuygur 10 Jun

The #NSA actions are clearly against the fourth amendment. Are supporters saying they don't care about 4th amend or constitution?
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
Expand
Jeff Jarvis @jeffjarvis 10 Jun

http://www.wbur.org/listen/live RT @ggreenwald: Live on NPR now, for the next hour with Tom Ashbrook.
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
Expand
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald 10 Jun

Live on NPR now, for the next hour with Tom Ashbrook.
Expand
Eli Lake @EliLake 10 Jun

If we knew all about the NSA programs @ggreenwald and his source disclosed, then why is the leak so damaging to national security? #bothways
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
Expand
Strobe Talbott @strobetalbott 8 Jun

.@Guardian emerging as global source of old-fashioned journalism via new media: e.g., breaking data mining story. Good on them, good for us
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
Expand
Lorraine @Ms_Raine 10 Jun

YUP RT @Sttbs73 Anyone else think @ggreenwald should be tried for treason alongside #snowden
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
View conversation
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald 10 Jun

Irony: there's nobody hated more by those who play "journalists" on TV than those who bring transparency to the US Government
Expand
TODAY @todayshow 10 Jun

"There's not a single revelation...that remotely jeopardizes national security." -@GGreenwald
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
Expand
Morning Joe @Morning_Joe 10 Jun

.@ggreenwald says 'rampant abuse' needs sunlight and that is why Snowden came forward. Our interview: http://nbcnews.to/104Sp6t #morningjoe
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
Expand
TODAY @todayshow 10 Jun

MT ?@MeleaAdrianna Up on @TodayShow: @GGreenwald talks to @SavannahGuthrie about breaking the NSA snooping story. 15 to air.
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
Expand
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald 10 Jun

The last generation's greatest whistleblower, Daniel Ellsberg, on one of this genreation's greatest, Edward Snowden http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/10/edward-snowden-united-stasi-america?CMP=twt_gu …
View summary
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald 10 Jun

If everyone is so sure this spying is legal, why does Obama DOJ keep preventing federal courts from ruling on its constitutionality?
Expand
Peter Kofod @peterkofod 10 Jun

Now is a good time to re-read @ggreenwald 's piece on the bravery of whistle-blowers: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/07/whistleblowers-and-leak-investigations … #IStandforEdwardSnowden #NSA
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
View summary
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald 10 Jun

For all you overnight experts on the state of civil liberties in Hong Kong, read @JamesFallows http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/06/edward-snowden-in-hong-kong/276692/ …
View summary
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald 10 Jun

For all of you criticizing Snowden's choice about where to go: feel free to offer what you think was his better alternative.
Expand
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald 10 Jun

We'll be putting the focus back where it belongs very shortly: on the conduct of the US Government
Expand
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald 10 Jun

Instead of criticizing Snowden for trying to stay out of US prisons, we should ask why whistleblowers in the US feel compelled to flee
Expand
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald 10 Jun

Bart Gellman's claims about Snowden's interactions with me - when, how and why - are all false.
Expand
digby @digby56 10 Jun

A profile in courage #EdwardSnowden http://bit.ly/19dS1pk
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
Expand
Glenn Greenwald @ggreenwald 10 Jun

Any Twitter or Facebook accounts purporting to be Edward Snowden are fake.
Expand
Trevor Timm @trevortimm 10 Jun

I was just with Dan Ellsberg as he learned out about Edward Snowden. He called Snowden a hero, said he's been waiting for him for 40 years.
Retweeted by Glenn Greenwald
Expand

So maybe that's why people saying it was deleted. I think responses don't necessarily show up in ones feed?

[Luminous Animal]

95. You have to click on "all" and then you get the replies.

And yes. The link has been posted on this thread so the tweet hasn't been deleted. If it had been deleted, the post would not appear. You went to all this trouble to support a lie.

[Hissyspit]

40. He didn't delete it. It's still there in his feed.

[Luminous Animal]

42. More lies. Here is the direct link to the tweet... not deleted.

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/344040301972815872

[DisgustipatedinCA]

64. You have made a false statement. Will you retract it?

[BehindTheCurtain76]

51. huh?

He refers to Snowden as 'him'...not by name. There is no contradiction...and you don't think Clapper lied????? Everyone saw it from a direct question by my favorite Senator, Ron Wyden. No mincing words...flat out lied. You want Greenwald to be the enemy? Please get your priorities straight...you say you are a Democrat...a Democrat would not support lies, deceit and criminality...I miss JFK.

[Luminous Animal]

48. I've communicated with you on DU and I don't know your name or where you work. And no,

he didn't say he TALKED to him. He said he and Laura Poitras have worked with him since February.

[MjolnirTime]

82. keep mincing those words and you'll get the answer you seek.

[Whisp]

16. Glen, you gonna tell us who suckered you in?

sucker? Was it your hero Rand or the old man?

[flamingdem]

19. He wanted to be in pictures

If not that Secretary of State under Rand Paul

[Cha]

24. SOS of

the dickhead dept.

[MjolnirTime]

83. He coulda been a contender!

Instead he shit the bed.

[Cha]

21. Yeah, and that little fucker is a BIG LIAR

http://theobamadiary.com/2013/06/24/chat-away-questions/#comments

[ucrdem]

26. Nailed it.

Kaboom.

[Hissyspit]

29. Um, none of this proves conspiracy.

Why are you acting like it does?

[ucrdem]

31. Who said anything about conspiracy?

Infowars is thataway.

[Hissyspit]

32. That is what charges would be based on.

And your info wars reference is laughable. You are the one who trades in misrepresentation and speculation, as I have pointed out many times before.

There is nothing here inconsistent with what Greenwald has said previously, that I can see.

[Luminous Animal]

45. This has got to be one of the most bizarre threads I have ever seen...

Why would Greenwald need to know his name or where he worked in order to communicate with him. I don't know your name or where you work.

[Cha]

30. Yeah, why mince words and

tip toe around that.

People are all freaking out because they say James Clapper "lied" when he couldn't give certain revelations to Congress. But, Greenwald's a Liar.. "oh who cares?"

[Hissyspit]

33. Where is the lie?

[Luminous Animal]

49. You will never get an answer because there isn't one.

[BehindTheCurtain76]

55. wow

Wow...that's kinda harsh isn't it? He's a journalist. No need to swear...we are all on the same team including Glenn...I'm assuming. I dont comment here much but have visited every day for many years. Obviously you are dedicated given the tens of thousands of posts you have...you should be getting paid for that kind of work you are putting in.

[ucrdem]

61. "we are all on the same team including Glenn":

No really, we aren't. We are all God's children, yes. But Greenwald is a Koch-CATO-Libertarian funded swifttboater and saboteur and this is Democratic Underground. Not only is he not on our team, he is on the Teabagger-right and they are, to put it mildly, our political rivals.

Now that we've straightened all that out I hope, welcome!

[BehindTheCurtain76]

89. really?

I cannot believe that for a second...Ive been reading his columns forever and he definitely sounds more like a Progressive further to the left of most people here. Where do you get this stuff...you do know that he is also Gay right? And hated by the Bush lovers. I dont believe a word you're saying. Prove me wrong.

[warrior1]

36. good catch ProSense

[Luminous Animal]

46. I've been communicating with you for years and I don't know your name or where you work.

[ProSense]

52. WTF? n/t

[Luminous Animal]

53. We communicate... here on DU... I don't know your name or where you work.

Why would you expect Greenwald to know Snowden's private info during their initial conversations?

[ProSense]

54. LOL!

[Hissyspit]

57. Instead of laughing could you explain

what it is your posts are supposed to be proving?

Because I can't find anything in them like what people are claiming them to prove, which is the point of the post you are laughing at.

[ProSense]

60. No, and

Instead of laughing could you explain

what it is your posts are supposed to be proving?

Because I can't find anything in them like what people are claiming them to prove, which is the point of the post you are laughing at.

...others seem to have no problem understanding them so I take this as obfuscation.

[Hissyspit]

62. You mean the people who say GG deleted a tweet he didn't delete?

You mean the people who think this means Greenwald lied about what he did, when there is no evidence he did?

I really would like to know. If I'm missing something, show it to me. I knew Greenwald said he had communication with Snowden in February. I saw the tweet when he first tweeted it. And hadn't forgotten it. I know he is saying he didn't know his name until Hong Kong. What am I missing. No, it's not obfuscation, so, wrong on that, too, apparently. Not that there's not a lot of obfuscation going on.

[ProSense]

65. Why are you asking me to explain other people's comments?

Take it up with them.

[Hissyspit]

70. I didn't. You said people were understanding

your post. I said they were taking things from it that weren't there. I asked you to explain your response to LA, because his was the same point. You didn't answer his question or explain your response. By the way, I did ask them to explain. No one responded.

[ProSense]

71. Right, but how does that make me responsible for other people's comments? n/t

[Hissyspit]

73. Then why did you laugh at LA's post?

Last edited Mon Jun 24, 2013, 10:27 PM - Edit history (1)

[Major Hogwash]

67. What's the problem?

You seem to be getting too personally involved with this Greenwald flake.

That's not a good idea.
I don't think you know him very well.

[Hissyspit]

68. What a dumb response.

[Major Hogwash]

69. Greenwald has lawyered up . . . and that ain't for nothing!!

He's not going to be able to smartmouth his way out of this.

[Hissyspit]

72. Thank you for all that lack of substance.

By the way, I've been here 10 years, reading Greenwald's blog for almost as long, and following his Twitter account for almost as long.

It's not so much Greenwald I care about as people here making shit up and using fallacious arguments like "if he got a lawyer, he is guilty of something."

I can't imagine why Greenwald would want a lawyer:

http://www.guardiannews.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/24/surveillance-us-national-security

In early January, email messages from HBGary Federal show plans for a meeting with Booz Allen Hamilton, apparently regarding Barr's plans against WikiLeaks and Anonymous. At this point, no one was buying Barr's scheme – even as he bragged to the Financial Times, on 4 February 2012, that he had used Facebook, Twitter and other social media to identify the "leaders" of Anonymous.

Barr believed that had piqued the interest of the "FBI, the Director of National Intelligence, and the US military". In fact, it had merely made him a marked man: two days later, as Wired reported, Anonymous "took down [HBGary Federal's] website, stole his emails, deleted the company's backup data, trashed Barr's Twitter account and remotely wiped his iPad." For his part, Brown created Project PM, "a crowd-sourced wiki focused on government intelligence contractors" to delve through the tens of thousands of emails taken from HBGary Federal's servers.

A critical element in the story concerns the fact that, according to one of the leaked emails, the companies were hoping that "if they can show that WikiLeaks is hosting data in certain countries it will make prosecution easier." The hacked emails also revealed, Forbes reported, that Barr was hoping to sell the information on Anonymous members to the FBI. The fact that Barr was stoking interest among security agencies with a dossier of supposed Anonymous members containing incorrect names meant that innocent people might have been jailed if he had succeeded in his scheme.

Barr resigned and HBGary Federal was subsequently shuttered. But the story doesn't end there. In July 2011, the Anonymous-linked "AntiSec" raided Booz Allen Hamilton and made off with 90,000 emails. One allegation that emerged from the cache was that BAH had been working with HBGary Federal "to develop software that would allow for the creation of multiple fake social media profiles to infiltrate discussion groups and manipulate opinion on the sites and discredit people, as well as to match personas online with offline identities."

Within days of the Team Themis scandal, Palantir issued a statement announcing that it was cutting ties with HBGary Federal and issued an apology to Greenwald.

[Major Hogwash]

75. Hahaha!!!

I've been here for 10 years!!!

[Hissyspit]

80. What the fuck is that supposed to mean?

You got nothing, huh?

Notice you didn't address anything else I pointed out. Do me a favor and quit talking to me.

[Major Hogwash]

92. Well, you aren't supposed to be so emotional over something you can't control.

But, your "I've been here 10 years" comment is totally ironic.

That's what Snowden and Greenwald are going to be telling other prisoners on their cell block in 11 years!!!!

[OilemFirchen]

56. Though not one to make definitive predictions...

Last edited Mon Jun 24, 2013, 09:34 PM - Edit history (1)

I'm happy, in this case, to temporarily abandon the habit:

Greenwald's "career" is over.

May he join Stephen Glass, Jason Blair and Jeff Gannon in ignominy.

[Whisp]

66. jason leopold, you can add one more. eom

[Skip Intro]

74. Say you destroy Snowden's image, what does that get Obama?

Snowden is frequently attacked, much of it ridiculous and childish and clearly part of a larger effort to completely discredit him.

From my perspective, it seems a strategy of discrediting anyone who says anything negative about the president or 'makes the president look bad.' That's how most of the attack-Snowden posts come across to me. Just like the "you're a racist if you criticize Obama" ones. You know what I'm talking about.

But I never considered it from the poster's perspective. What motivates one to go directly to the character of the person who expresses the wrong opinion or shares a piece of silly news, and just go to town? Like in this case with Snowden. Say you guys succeed and he becomes despised worldwide. What does that get Obama, when all that Snowden exposed and has yet to expose is still there? How is Obama helped, image-wise?

Or is it just diversion, and that's all?

[usGovOwesUs3Trillion]

76. psst... there's this thing folks use all the time online called nicknames/aliases

FYI

[grantcart]

79. Do you really believe that Snowden didn't reveal that he was an NSA subcontractor?

doubtful as it was reported in depth in his Guardian article.

"I didn't even know where Mr. Snowden worked

More to the point the question isn't whether GG knew how to spell his name but whether or not he was offering him substantive assistance which he apparently boasted about. It seems clear that there was advanced consultation, I don't know why GG is being evasive, if he thinks nothing bad was done he should be straightforward about it.

[treestar]

86. As a journalist, why would he want to publish anything based on

information about someone he did not know and did now know where he worked? Anyone could claim to have access.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

90. Could he not know where he worked and still know he was an NSA subcontractor?

Maybe he didn't know the name of the firm but knew what kind of work he performed??

I assume the NSA has more than one subcontractor?

[ProSense]

93. He had to know something concrete. He didn't make all those preparations based on nothing. n/t

[Hissyspit]

96. Or not.

[grantcart]

99. The point is if he didn't know its because he purposefully kept it ambiguous while he was getting

the top secret information. To say that he didn't know the guy's name or company name is quite disingenuous.

But for me it is quite irrelevant. GG like Assange act as publishers and I find them quite harmless even though I don't like either of them.

If GG or Assange didn't publish the information then another media outlet would have. The legal responsibility lies with the leaker not the publisher. And while I don't like Snowden either I have to admit I give him some credit for at least standing up publicly and taking credit for what he did. I don't think he has any idea of the legal ramifications he will feel the rest of his life but at least he didn't try and do it secretly like Manning did.

[Th1onein]

78. Prosense, they are calling you intellectually dishonest on another thread.

I'm not going to say whether I agree with them or not. But you should read the post: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023087733

I think you should probably respond to it, as well. I, for one, would be interested to hear your explanation/defense.

[ProSense]

84. I welcome their hatred.

Thanks for pointing that out.

"I think you should probably respond to it, as well. I, for one, would be interested to hear your explanation/defense."

No, I'm full, thanks.

[MjolnirTime]

81. Glenn's getting awful weasely. He was so smug just a day or two ago.

[joshcryer]

88. Would this make Greenwald complicit?

[ProSense]

94. Who knows? n/t

[joshcryer]

97. DU lawyers.

ie, can a journalist communicate with someone who is willingly gathering information before the act or must the information already be gathered?

I would think it would be their responsibility to act.

Say, for instance, a serial killer told a journalist, "I am a murderer and am planning to kill someone." Would that not be the journalists' obligation to come forward with information to stop the future killing?

At minimum I would hope GG said "Please do not contact me again unless you have something useful to provide."

[Skraxx]

98. Wait, I Thought Greenwald Thoroughly Vetted Snowden

Huh?