Hillary Clinton Says It's Up To Snowden If He Returns To U.S. For Trial

[DonViejo]

Source: TPM

DYLAN SCOTT – JULY 5, 2014, 9:36 AM EDT

Hillary Clinton said it was "his decision" if NSA leaker Edward Snowden ever returned to the United States to face any legal consequences for his actions.

The presumptive 2016 presidential frontrunner made the comments in an interview published Friday by The Guardian, the newspaper that broke many of the stories made possible by Snowden's leak of classified information about NSA surveillance.

"If he wishes to return knowing he would be held accountable and also able to present a defense, that is his decision to make," Clinton said.

"In any case that I'm aware of as a former lawyer, he has a right to mount a defense," she continued. "And he certainly has a right to launch both a legal defence and a public defence, which can of course affect the legal defence.

-snip-

Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/hillary-clinton-edward-snowden-guardian

[riderinthestorm]

1. Since he can't legally defend himself with the charges as filed under the Espionage Act

http://pando.com/2014/01/22/how-whistleblowers-are-barred-from-defending-themselves-in-court/

I'm wondering if she's signaling she's willing to negotiate with him....

[MannyGoldstein]

10. Or sign that she doesn't understand the law

Or is having a Bosnian sniper moment.

[truth2power]

16. This sort of thing drives me nuts...

Since Ms. Clinton is a lawyer, she surely knows that the Espionage Act does not permit one to use their motivation for their action as a defense. Therefore, it's an open and shut case as far as Snowden is concerned.

And why isn't our supine media asking Hillary to explain how Snowden could successfully mount a defense, given those restrictions?

If it was a Republican making such stupid statements there would be little smilies all over this thread.

[7962]

17. You're right. nt

[riderinthestorm]

18. Ikr? Under the EA, he can't testify that he exposed illegal NSA actions because they were illegal

The court simply has to demonstrate that Snowden released confidential information (any confidential information) and he's guilty. That the charges were brought by Obama's AG indicates they don't care that he's between a rock and a hard place and is distinctly unfair. Its part and parcel of their viciousness towards whistleblowers.

This is why I wonder if Hillary's signalling a willingness to negotiate with his lawyers IF she's elected. I think she must know the nuances here... Saying she thinks he should come back to the US for a FAIR trial means.... what? Exactly what?

But yeah, the point about the stupid media not even knowing what questions to ask her is infuriating. For me, since the privacy concerns and the NSA actions are pretty important, I'm interested in Hillary's position on this. Is she nuancing it now? Wish someone had gone deeper with her about it.

[MrMickeysMom]

29. Well-NAILED, truth2power!

"supine media" should make me put one of those emoticons in place, if it weren't such a shame to recognize it's meaning.

[KittyWampus]

23. is that Bosnian sniper moment like pretending you are Cherokee Indian ala Elizabeth Warren?

[MannyGoldstein]

24. Claiming to have fled from under Bosnian sniper fire when video footage proves otherwise

is the same as relaying what your parents told you about your ancestry.

Yeah, pretty much the same thing.

[reddread]

25. Rumors of the PUMA's endangered species status seem premature.

[djean111]

27. Bwahahahaha! Way to try and sneak in a right-wing smear!

Believing what one's parents tell you is not analogous to lying about ducking sniper fire. Weird political misstep, really, Clinton should have known there would be footage to the contrary.

[Evergreen Emerald]

34. I don't understand your response?

Are you saying he does not have the right to mount a defense?

[riderinthestorm]

35. He doesn't because he's been charged under the Espionage Act. Read the article in post #1

It lays it out pretty specifically

[MannyGoldstein]

36. He does not, under the law that he is charged. nt

[Evergreen Emerald]

37. So, it looks as if he can't mount a "motive" defense

He can't claim it was in the public interest. But, he can mount a defense: "prove it did it."

Clinton was therefore correct: they must prove he did it. So, Clinton does know the law.

[MannyGoldstein]

38. He's already confessed, so that's not really a viable defense.

Unless I'm mistaken, his only real defense is motive.

[Evergreen Emerald]

39. The government still must prove it.

Perhaps his confession would be excluded. There are no "slam dunks" when it comes to trial.

However, you suggested that Clinton does not know the law, when she was actually an excellent attny, and indeed does understand that everyone can mount a defense. Whether or not it is a successful defense remains to be seen.

I am troubled by the constant attacks against Clinton. In this case, as in many other attacks, the immediate reaction is one that requires twisting in order to attack when you suggest that she does not understand the law. She said he can mount a defense. She is correct.

[riderinthestorm]

40. Your post makes no sense. He's already confessed. Why would that be excluded?

There's not a prosecutor in the world who would exclude the many public statements Snowden's made.

And honestly your trial theory is absurd on the face of it.

Prosecutor: "Mr. Snowden, did you take and publically release classified NSA documents?"

Snowden: "Yes I did."

Prosecutor: "I rest my case".

Snowden can't say the NSA was acting illegally. Or that he was following a higher authority - defending the Constitution. Or whatever. Anything like that is impermissible.

I will say that unlike Manny I believe Hillary Clinton is smart enough and knows what's up. As I said from the start there's a reason she's saying Snowden deserves a fair trial. Im sure she knows he can't get one under the Espionage Act as he's charged now. I think she's always got a political motive for saying stuff like this... the key is reading between the lines. I'm wondering if she's signaling she's willing to negotiate

[Evergreen Emerald]

41. Ummm....you might want to check our constitution.

So, in our justice system, Snowden has the right not to testify against himself. The prosecutor must prove the charge. you suggest that no prosecutor would exclude the statement. But, as Clinton knows, it would not be the prosecutor who would exclude the statement, but the judge.

You state that my theory of the case is absurd. Talk to OJ or Casey Anthony. My theory of the case is that the state must prove every element of the charge, beyond a reasonable doubt. Whether or not he will succeed, is another matter. But, as Clinton stated, he has the right to mount a defense.

[riderinthestorm]

42. As has already been pointed out to you, his defense is his motive, which is disallowed under the EA

Snowden has already confessed to the charges. The only reality anymore is why did he do it (he's stated why in many interviews but would not be allowed to say why in court), and what penalty (if any) he should pay.

This has gone beyond absurd by bringing up OJ or Casey Anthony....

I'll leave you to have the last word err, analogy. This has gotten ridiculous.

[Evergreen Emerald]

43. And as has already been pointed out to you

Whether or not he has confessed is not the issue. He can mount a defense. You may consider it a weak defense, but nonetheless, he has the right to have the gov. prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt. Which is what Clinton was saying. So, when you attack her for not know the law--it is a superficial attack based on ignorance.

[1StrongBlackMan]

32. Except the linked article doesn't say what the title claims. eom.

[cantbeserious]

2. She Is Part Of The 1% - She Is Signaling That She Would Grant No Immunity - Remember HRC Is A DLCer

eom

[blkmusclmachine]

13. ^This.^

[Thinkingabout]

3. This is true, the US has been open to Snowden returning to the US and face his charges.

[840high]

22. I hope he doesn't. I like the guy.

[saidsimplesimon]

4. see comments 1&2, Edward can't come home yet. The day may

come when justice is no longer wearing a blindfold. It is my hope to live until that day.

[MrMickeysMom]

30. I'm confused by what you just said, there...

Are you saying that Justice shouldn't wear a blindfold?

Justice should weigh right from wrong objectively, no bias… no fear or imbalance of who she listens to more, regardless of identity, money, power, or BEING IN A WEAK POSITION.

Blind justice means IMPARTIALITY. Those blinders depict Justice's not being influenced by any of those things, right?

[QuestForSense]

5. A politically-crafted statement if I ever heard one.

Sounds like she's going to be a candidate.

[zeemike]

6. Best non answer yet.

Instead of choosing sides she told us something we all instinctively know to be true, It's his decision.

But that is the State Department training for you.

[onehandle]

7. Snowden is no Chelsea Manning. nt

[fbc]

8. He knew what he was doing and the consequences for his actions.

He's lucky he's not in solitary confinement.

That's why he's a hero. He knew the potential consequences and he did the right thing anyway.

[MannyGoldstein]

11. He's *fortunate* that he's not in solitary

It wasn't exactly luck - he was pretty crafty.

[ballyhoo]

9. Snowden should never return to the United States irrespective

who is President. Our government is so fascist it would make Erich Mielke blush. And he should stay as far away from DLCer Hillary Clinton as is humanly possible.

[bemildred]

12. Very nice of her to admit that. nt

[Helen Borg]

14. Snowden 2016

[bahrbearian]

15. Duh,

[OnyxCollie]

19. Eric Holder doesn't believe Snowden has a right to mount a defense.

Attorney General Eric Holder Speaks at Northwestern University School of Law
Chicago ~ Monday, March 5, 2012
http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/ag/speeches/2012/ag-speech-1203051.html

Some have argued that the President is required to get permission from a federal court before taking action against a United States citizen who is a senior operational leader of al Qaeda or associated forces. This is simply not accurate. “Due process” and “judicial process” are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process.

[1StrongBlackMan]

33. Granted, I only scanned the linked article; but, ...

I don't see where he said anything of the sort.

[quadrature]

20. who decides... which accused criminals are pursued when offshore??? ....nt

[DeSwiss]

21. What a load of.....

- This bullshit doesn't even rate my contempt.....

[MrMickeysMom]

31. I must acquire the bullshit up the flagpole gif!

[djean111]

26. Duh. And Hillary has no standing at this time in regards to what happens to Snowden.

[snot]

28. So I guess the point of that was, we're not making any efforts to kidnap him.