Email exchange between Edward Snowden & former GOP Sen Gordon Humphrey ("you have done right thing"

[kpete]

Source: Guardian

Former two-term GOP Senator Gordon Humphrey of New Hampshire emailed Edward Snowden yesterday
"I believe you have done the right thing in exposing what I regard as massive violation of the United States Constitution"

Mr. Snowden,

Provided you have not leaked information that would put in harms way any intelligence agent, I believe you have done the right thing in exposing what I regard as massive violation of the United States Constitution.

Having served in the United States Senate for twelve years as a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, the Armed Services Committee and the Judiciary Committee, I think I have a good grounding to reach my conclusion.

I wish you well in your efforts to secure asylum and encourage you to persevere.

Kindly acknowledge this message, so that I will know it reached you.

Regards,
Gordon J. Humphrey
Former United States Senator
New Hampshire

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/16/gordon-humphrey-email-edward-snowden

---

other responses at link

[KoKo]

1. Recommend!

[kelliekat44]

19. Was the good Senator around for the vote on the Patriot Act and such?

If so, how did he vote?

[Gore1FL]

26. He served 1979 to 1990 n/t

[bunnies]

44. "good" is the last description I'd use for a man who thinks gays deserve aids.

He's a truly vile human being, at best.

[GliderGuider]

2. Sweet!!! And here's Snowden's response:

Mr. Humphrey,

Thank you for your words of support. I only wish more of our lawmakers shared your principles - the actions I've taken would not have been necessary.

The media has distorted my actions and intentions to distract from the substance of Constitutional violations and instead focus on personalities. It seems they believe every modern narrative requires a bad guy. Perhaps it does. Perhaps, in such times, loving one's country means being hated by its government.

If history proves that be so, I will not shy from that hatred. I will not hesitate to wear those charges of villainy for the rest of my life as a civic duty, allowing those governing few who dared not do so themselves to use me as an excuse to right these wrongs.

My intention, which I outlined when this began, is to inform the public as to that which is done in their name and that which is done against them. I remain committed to that. Though reporters and officials may never believe it, I have not provided any information that would harm our people - agent or not - and I have no intention to do so.

Further, no intelligence service - not even our own - has the capacity to compromise the secrets I continue to protect. While it has not been reported in the media, one of my specializations was to teach our people at DIA how to keep such information from being compromised even in the highest threat counter-intelligence environments (i.e. China).

You may rest easy knowing I cannot be coerced into revealing that information, even under torture.

With my thanks for your service to the nation we both love,

Edward Snowden

Rock on, Ed! I completely share Humphrey's opinion.

[pnwmom]

3. The Rethugs love that they can pin Obama with surveillance that he's scaled back

since Bush began it in 2001. What fun this must be for them!

[Psephos]

12. You still really think this is about R vs. D...

...which is exactly what they want.

[pnwmom]

13. Bengahzi, the IRS, etc.

This is just another manufactured scandal, since the Rethugs in Congress passed the Patriot Act during the Bush administration, and have approved several extensions since.

None of this was a surprise to them, but they can play-act surprise for their gullible constituents.

[Android3.14]

22. Oh suuuuuure, it was just the Republicans that voted for the USA PATRIOT Act. Suuuure.

It seems that someone with as much time as you have would actually pay attention to what our leaders do. They all (except Russ Feingold) voted for it. Repuke and Dem.
Grow up, learn the difference between liberty and freedom, and clean the fecal matter from your ears.

[pnwmom]

40. It was passed by an overwhelming margin of both parties. But it's the Rethugs now

who are trying to use it to smear the Obama administration.

[NoMoreWarNow]

36. it is nothing like that-- the media does NOT want to deal with these issues

they are the one making it all about Snowden.

[Android3.14]

46. No. This is not a manufactured scandal

This goes far beyond any political philosophy, and the folks who haven't figured it out tend to receive nothing but ridicule, which is unfortunate. The truth is that those clueless folks really deserve pity at their own willful ignorance.
This is an on-going scandal in which Obama has participated. And really, you tell me which is the more pathetic human being, the rapist or the man or woman who drops their date at the rapist's house, knowing the rapist will victimize the person for which they have accepted responsibility?
The reason I responded to you in the first place is because you are spreading down right lies. The Repukes are bad enough, but your lies make it sound like the sweet innocent Democrats have just been railroaded by the big bad wolf, when actually they all have been walking hand-in-hand from the beginning.

[pnwmom]

48. Because they're most concerned with protecting their own legacy,

now that they're out of office. How can they condemn Obama for continuing what they started? (Albeit in a scaled back form.)

They don't need to use this as an issue to get re-elected.

[former9thward]

59. Most elected Republicans have attacked Snowden.

So much for your meme.

[pnwmom]

62. Do you have data to back up your "most" claim?

[former9thward]

63. Just watching the news.

I suppose you can come up with all these Republicans who are pro-Snowden. It should be easy since you say they all are since it is just a way to attack Obama.

[pnwmom]

64. Most of them aren't saying anything. They're just happy watching the Dems tear each other apart.

[pocoloco]

60.

T

[karynnj]

4. He opted not to run for reelection in 1990 - he was head of the conservative caucus

and seems to have no background in law.

(I didn't remember him and thought I was likely not alone.

[Turbineguy]

5. Of course, it was not

a massive violation of the Constitution before Obama got there.

[Laelth]

6. Interesting. k&r for exposure. n/t

-Laelth

[Cryptoad]

7. Funny how the

the far Right and far Left now endorse our enemies having unlimited and Private access to all our communication system. Snowden to date has not expose a single illegal act. He is just a two bit traitor!

[Fantastic Anarchist]

10. Your sentence seemed contradictory.

If our enemies have "unlimited and <p>rivate access to all our communication system <sic>, then he did expose an illegal act. If they don't, then he didn't. One of your assertions has to be incorrect.

[Cryptoad]

34. Thats right, he has not exposed any illegal act.

Our enemies don't have that Unlimited and private access thanks to the our Government.

I did not state that they do.

You seem to be making stuff up as you type.

I said some endorse that they do.

No Contradictions ,

A critical reading course might help you.

[JDPriestly]

37. The Constitution protects our rights to privacy.

The massive collection of metadata is a violation of our rights under the Fourth Amendment but also of our First Amendment rights.

If we are to exercise our freedoms of religion, speech, the press, assembly and our right to petition the government for our grievances, we have to have the right to communicate without the government's knowledge.

This is a violation of the highest law in our land -- the Constitution.

In addition, the fact that they collect the metadata and get secret court orders for attorneys violates our right to a fair trial and the assistance of counsel.

This is program violates the Constitution in a number of ways.

[Cryptoad]

66. That is your Opinion

to which you are entitled to , but it is not the Law.

The Law says nothing illegal has taken place.

You are using the same pseudo legal logic that the Tea Party uses.

[Swagman]

71. and the law can be an ass

as a recent 'stand your ground' case in Florida demonstrated.

[Cryptoad]

77. agreed nt

[bunnies]

8. Humphrey is a teabagging piece of shit.

Fuck him. Carry on.

[woo me with science]

9. Huge K&R

The support is very good news. And a *superb* response by Snowden.

[railsback]

11. The Guardian has to slip him $5 for this

[bunnies]

32. Gordon "affirmative action is reverse discrimination" Humphrey?

Doubt youd have to pay him to be against the black guy, if ya know what I mean.

[Arctic Dave]

14. K&R

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

15. Too easy.

CONCORD - Ovide Lamontagne should come clean about his anti-choice agenda as he accepts the endorsement of extreme anti-choice activist former U.S. Senator Gordon Humphrey, New Hampshire Democratic Party officials said today.

“Ovide Lamontagne supports an amendment to the constitution that would make abortion a crime in all cases, including rape and incest, and that would even criminalize some forms of birth control and fertility treatments,” said Collin Gately, spokesman for the New Hampshire Democratic Party. “But he has been trying to hide his extreme agenda, refusing to say where he stands on important issues like funding Planned Parenthood. It’s time for Ovide Lamontagne to be clear with the people of New Hampshire about his anti-choice views, and what those views would mean to their lives.”

As a U.S. Senator, Humphrey supported efforts to de-fund Planned Parenthood, even going against officials in the Reagan administration to further the effort. Humphrey even backed Operation Rescue Founder Randall Terry in his congressional campaign.

http://nhdp.org/blog/2012/07/09/extreme-anti-choice-activist-gordon-humphrey-supports-ovide-lamontagne-for-governor/

[Tarheel_Dem]

17. Sounds like the ultimate Teabagger to me. They alledgedly "love the Constitution", for some folks.

I don't think they actually discovered the Constitution until Obama was elected. Yeah, this is one show of support I don't think I'd brag about. Reminds me of these nutjobs.







And then there's the crazy assed Larouchies who aid & abet the Teanutters:

[Cryptoad]

38. Hate

&feature=player_embedded

[Tarheel_Dem]

42. Ugh. I only made it about 3 minutes in. These are the folks who support Snowie!

[Swagman]

70. why oh why did God make everyone of his disciples in

that movie so butt ugly ???

[Cha]

69. Yeah, someone like that would be all gung ho, snowden.. ya

"did the right thing".

asshole.. and this is who snowden lovers are holding up for "see, this guy thinks snowden's doing the right thing".. so neener neener neener.

[Tarheel_Dem]

16. The irony is too delicious. If he had said anything in support of Obama, the reaction would be.....

predictably different. Hell, Obama can't even have a former Republican president at the WH, without the Hair On Fire brigade going nuts.

"Originally a liberal, Humphrey said he converted to conservativsm because of "the force of my own logic".[1]

In 1977, Humphrey became the leader of the New Hampshire chapter of Conservative Caucus, which had been looking for someone to head it up for months. Humphrey volunteered and began organizing signature-gathering for petitions and putting together well-attended rallies......"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_J._Humphrey

Maybe Eddie can get a kissy kissy letter from Norm Coleman next?

[bunnies]

20. And this is the same asshat who accused Dartmouth of reverse racism.

Last edited Tue Jul 16, 2013, 05:26 PM - Edit history (1)

Today Senator Gordon J. Humphrey, a conservative Republican from New Hampshire, plans to accompany a group of students to the Capitol to announce two lawsuits accusing Dartmouth College of racial discrimination and of violating students' rights of free speech.

Dartmouth recently suspended three students after finding them guilty of ''vexatious oral exchange'' with a music professor, whose teaching they had criticized in The Dartmouth Review, an independent campus newspaper.

The students argue that all exchanges, even vexatious ones, are protected under the First Amendment of the Constitution and that they are victims of racial discrimination. (The student reporters are white. The music professor is black.) ''The facts clearly indicate that the students would not have been given such draconian penalties if they were black students criticizing a white professor,'' said Harvey Kuhn, a New York lawyer whose firm is representing the students.

http://www.nytimes.com/1988/07/27/us/washington-talk-briefing-just-like-the-60-s.html

and

''The elite Ivy League academics constantly proclaim themselves the champions of free speech and diversity of opinion. Yet here, when a small band of students express a viewpoint offensive to the prevailing orthodoxy, the college comes squarely down on the side of suppression and harsh persecution.''

http://www.apnewsarchive.com/1988/Conservative-Paper-At-Dartmouth-Sues-School-Over-Disciplinary-Action/id-52c949100b29908a33342fd732be862e

He also calls Obama, Reid & Pelosi liars and traitors. Oh well, he supports Snowden. YAY!

[Tarheel_Dem]

29. YAY indeed. All the whackos lining up to support a fugitive. Why are they all crazy?

Exhibit A:

[bunnies]

35. Makes me sick to see this idiot lauded on DU.

Gordon Humphrey:

Anti-affirmative action
Anti-choice
Anti-equality
Voted against hate crimes legislation
Voted against programs designed to stop the spread of Aids
Thinks homosexuality is a unacceptable lifestyle

DU hero.

[Tarheel_Dem]

41. You know what they say, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". As unlikely as it is, we know who....

the "enemy" is around here.

[bunnies]

43. yep. 26 recs for a man who thinks gay people deserve aids.

Snowdens new "friend":

http://www.nbcuniversalarchives.com/nbcuni/clip/5112536569_012.do

[Tarheel_Dem]

47. "Unsanitary & Immoral". Way to go DU. The perils of jumping onto the hero worship bandwagon.

Glenn Greenwald didn't bother to tell us this when he released the communications. What does that say about him? I agree

[AllINeedIsCoffee]

55. The people that start threads against Obama for saying kind words about a former President.

They get more transparent all the time.

[Swagman]

72. nice case of guilty by association

the Russians, Chinese, a Republican...all bringing out the jingoism in many who we hoped knew better

[Number23]

52. "infromed" Classic!!!

[Tarheel_Dem]

53. Isn't that precious?

[copperearth]

18. This does not surprise me

Gordon Humphrey was Tea Party before there was a Tea Party. All along I have suspected that the "Right" was behind Snowden. Wouldn't surprise me if the Koch Brothers and their Ultra rich kind didn't paid the guy to release this NSA spy information.
While I don't like the idea that this much information is being collected by our Government, every country that can is doing the same thing. When Gordon Humphrey was a Senator he was on the Foreign Relations Committee and also the Committee overseeing the Soviet War in Afghanistan. He was Senator when Jimmy Carter was President as well as Ronald Reagan and he voted against every single budget sent all 12 years he was in the Senate. Great American. Doesn't surprise me he thinks Snowden is exemplary. He is ultra conservative and absolutely anti-Democrati. Anything these people can do to hurt the Democrats and Obama is their main goal. Snowden is just their pawn.

[karynnj]

28. No it doesn't

The argument is not that all Republicans love Snowden. To me it seems his strongest supporters lie on the very far reaches of each party - especially in Libertarian circles. That's not where Bush Cheney were.

[JDPriestly]

39. Snowden's strongest supporters are people everywhere who love human

rights. One of those rights is privacy in our papers and things unless the government gets a subpoena based on probable cause.

Courts have ruled in the past that the government may acquire pen registers without a subpoena in the context of a criminal investigation.

Courts have never ruled that the wholesale collection of metadata on law-abiding citizens that is not done in the context of a criminal investigation is legal. Never.

[karynnj]

45. I resent that

Many of his critics have good strong records on human rights.

[Tarheel_Dem]

49. Like Naomi Wolfe, who was unceremoniously thrown under the bus.

[JDPriestly]

68. Impossible. You cannot be for human rights and also support secret surveillance on

American citizens. The two are incompatible.

You can't be for democracy and favor secret surveillance either.

I'm very please that the UU church in LA has filed a lawsuit asserting that the surveillance program violates their freedom of association guaranteed in the First Amendment of the Constitution.

[Swagman]

73. my mini survey says the bulk of DUers overwhelmingly support

Snowden, Manning and Assange.

and I am suspicious of the vocal anti-Snowden crowd who are condemning the man because he went to Hong Kong or is now asking for temporary asylum in Russia...these are not true Democratic principals, they are not intelligent views today.
The Russian or Chinese people are not your enemy and inferring that Snowden is a 'traitor' (or Manning is) reeks of plants from the far right.

[karynnj]

74. That is nonsense

First of all having access - if justified and with a FISA court approval - to telephone records is hardly "surveillance". For decades, my various providers have had that - and would have given it to any government representative with a subpoena. The difference is only that the government has the archive now. Snowden arguing that he could - in his job - access anyone's information ignores that it was against his ethics code to do so. No different than the fact that decades ago AT&T phone operators could have listened to any operator placed call - though doing so was grounds for firing. (Note that that - unlike the NSA - gets the content, not just the record that they spoke. ( Snowden's actions do suggest that the government needs to do a better job on clearance and supervision of people like Snowden - computer experts who aren't particularly likely to abide by rules. )

What does this have to do with all the things normally called human rights?

Just because organizations file lawsuits does not mean that they will win them. I suspect that the UU church may have a very difficult time proving that the program had any impact at all on their freedom of association.

I do think that the country needs to have Congress assure that as many safeguards as needed are in place here as possible to prevent abuse. This is why I am more impressed with people like Wyden who actually are working within the government to do so.

As to Snowden, I don't think we learned anything more about the OUTLINE of the phone intercepts than we learned if we watched Congress - especially in 2006 and 2007. I followed the internet program less - but at least 2 very knowledgeable people I know have said they learned nothing new.

[JDPriestly]

75. The Constitution prohibits the GOVERNMENT, not private companies from violating our rights.

These surveillance programs are "secret." That means that neither you nor I really know what is going on. Why would a program like this be "secret"? What is our government hiding from us?

Why isn't it open and honest and transparent with us as Obama promised?

I'll tell you what I firmly believe until the facts to the contrary are proven. I think that in some if not all instances, our government pipes right into the billing and records of our communications companies and siphons off all our records.

The case law has authorized the government to obtain pen registers from private communications services providers in specific criminal inquiries. The government has interpreted that to mean that it can obtain vast amounts of data of the nature of a pen register and subpoena via a secret court any specific records it desires.

Snowden told us that in fact the individuals who manage and understand the NSA's system, the systems managers, etc., can go in and get the records of any person whose e-mail address they have.

So that means first, that the government is abusing this program to go beyond just obtaining pen registers and thus wants to keep what it is doing a secret from us, and second, that the government is not respecting the limitations placed on it by the Constitution with regard to obtaining our papers and personal things with a warrant based on probable cause and with regard to respecting our rights under the First and other Amendments to our Constitution.

The government is overstepping.

In addition, to support my theory, please note that the secrecy about this program is so strongly enforced that even members of Congress like Wyden do not dare speak about its perils and excesses openly other than to hint that they exist.

And, the government hires outside contractors to do this dirty work. The extent to which our constitutional protections prohibit government contractors from violating our rights is a bit of a a gray area (or at least it was 20 years ago, and I haven't heard about a Supreme Court decision fully clarifying it).

The government is sneaking around.

In addition, the definition of terrorism in the Patriot Act and as applied is so vague and arbitrary as to be meaningless.

Why wasn't the guy who shot Gabby Gifford considered a terrorist while some guy who discusses a crazy scheme with a government instigator is hauled off to jail?

That makes utterly no sense to me.

Something stinks really badly here. It's all secret so pinpointing just what is wrong is difficult for an ordinary person like me. But something is very wrong.

Obama promised transparency. I understood that the government would be open with us, not that they would make our personal lives into transparent objects for their examination.

As I wrote yesterday, the propagandizing of Americans is what collecting our records is about. It makes propagandizing us much easier. The government can target our particular propensities and intellectual levels. The entire concept from collecting data to spewing government propaganda is anti-democracy and anti-human-rights.

During the 2012 election, Obama studied computer records and social networks to target voters and get them out. That system worked well. Now the government is incorporating that technique just as private companies have.

We don't want our government doing that kind of surveillance and then propagandizing and ultimately psychological control over us.

People who do not understand this don't deserve to be free and won't be for long.

[karynnj]

76. What Snowden said is that HE, given his role as computer expert, can get all these things

No surprise! the data exists and of course the system administrator could ILLEGALLY pull what he wants. That does NOT say that Obama or any other official has asked anyone to do this.

[JDPriestly]

78. The system that has been devise, however, enables Snowden or anyone in his position

in a PRIVATE COMPANY (?) to obtain what they want. We don't know whether our government will prosecute that assuming that it is illegal.

If the government doesn't prosecute a crime, that it is illegal is no assurance that it won't be committed repeatedly.

Do you think the Obama administration will prosecute those at Booz Allen who access records they aren't supposed to access? I seriously doubt it.

[karynnj]

79. yes I do think they should and will

The first one charged may be Snowden. I also t5hink this isa wake up call that they need a better clearance procedure, more oversight and they need built in ways to see what an employee is doing maybe with an ai overview that flags unusual behavior for human review.

In addition tyhey need to take back these jobs as federal government jobs when contracts end.

[marions ghost]

67. +++

[Number23]

54. "his strongest supporters lie on the very far reaches of each party"

I agree 100%. And there is no question that the only reason he's gotten the support that he's gotten from the Repubs is because he made his "ground breaking, blockbuster" leaks during a Democratic president's term.

[HardTimes99]

31. The "gotcha" elements of this tit-for-tat notwithstanding, the

Snowden Affair has made for some very interesting, weird and even trippy convergences.

To wit, I never once dreamed that I would find myself on the same side of any issue as Glenn Beck (pro Snowden0, much as I am sure that President Obama's staunchest defenders here never dreamed they would find themselves on the same side of any issue with Bush and Cheney (pro administration).

I am not a political scientist and so am at something of a loss to explain why this should be so and, more importantly, what it means. But I do find it exceedingly weird.

[karynnj]

51. there was a difference between Bush and Obama

Bush started the program illegally. It was exposed in 2005 and in 2006/2007, Congress passed laws that allowed it with some changes to continue - and in a controversial move they retroactively gave the telecos protect from lawsuits. Since then it has changed again - with many Senators once against it voting for it.

As to saying this is "Bush's", how far is this from Kerry saying in 2004 that non state terrorism sound be fought with international intelligence and law enforcement. Unlike Bush, he would have done it legally.

[OnyxCollie]

56. Congress jumped to Bush's aid

to make the illegal, "legal," (while still violating the Fourth Amendment.)

Congress (which included then Sen. Barack Obama) gave retroactive immunity to the telecoms. Gotta keep them happy and protect them from damages ($1,000 per day per person.)

Quit blaming Bush. Obama owns this now.

[karynnj]

57. The supreme court is not convinced it violates the 4th amendment nt

[OnyxCollie]

58. Really?

Seems like they chose to punt.

Supreme Court Lets Stand Telecom Immunity In Wiretap Case

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court is leaving in place a federal law that gives telecommunications companies legal immunity for helping the government with its email and telephone eavesdropping program.

The justices said Tuesday they will not review a court ruling that upheld the 2008 law against challenges brought by privacy and civil liberties advocates on behalf of the companies' customers. The companies include AT&T, Inc., Sprint Nextel Corp. and Verizon Communications Inc.

Lawsuits filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and Electronic Frontier Foundation accused the companies of violating the law and customers' privacy through collaboration with the National Security Agency on intelligence gathering.

Read more: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SUPREME_COURT_WARRANTLESS_WIRETAPPING?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-10-09-09-58-20

[karynnj]

65. That is not even about the current progtram

that is about the fact that all these companies were involved before the August 2007 bill that gave the program some legal underpinnings. This case questioned whether that could be done retroactively.

[KoKo]

25. I've not seen the TeaParty Right nor the RW Crazies in Congress supporting Snowden...

They've been largely silent. It's been Democrats like DiFi who have gone after Snowden.

[meanit]

27. BTW,

Gordon Humphrey is a right wing asshole. He's the only senator who voted against aid for California after the big earthquake in 1989, remember? Said it wasn't paid for in the budget or some such shit.
He was ahead of his time by today's standards for Tea Bag assholishness.

[Tarheel_Dem]

30. OMG, he's Ted Cruz & Rand Paul all rolled into one happy teabag.

[arely staircase]

33. "Provided you have not leaked information that would put in harms way any intelligence agent"

of course he gave information that could endanger NSA agents to Der Speigel. Luckily the magazine was responsible enough not to print that info.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023261624

So Snowden gets the support of a fellow rw loon who doesn' know the guy has already betrayed NSA employees.

Classic.

[Tarheel_Dem]

50. Russia's in a tough spot. I don't envy them. Pootie Put wants him off his doorstep, and I'll....

guarantee, if granted temporary asylum, Snowie will be the most closely monitored guest of any country EVER. His reputation precedes him, and a hacker that ain't working for Putin will not be allowed a lot of internet freedom.

[99th_Monkey]

61. BREAKING: Ding! Dong! Broken Clock Correct At Least Twice A Day!! eom

[struggle4progress]

80. Wait, wait! Don't tell me! Could Gordon Humphrey be yet another libertarian ahole?

He supported Reagan's wars in Central America, wanted us to throw a naval blockade around Cuba but opposed sanctions against South Africa, and refused to discuss nuclear weapons issues with his constituents in town meetings, so the ahole part is pretty clear

Oh, and he joined CATO in 2008!

What a surprise!