John Oliver Flew to Russia to Interview Edward Snowden for One of the Best Clips You’ll See All Year

[Douglas Carpenter]

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Brilliant. nt

[yuiyoshida]

43. I second that...

Brilliant!

[Rockyj]

49. BEST OF THE BEST! LMAO!

[Oakenshield]

3. Well, this should make some noise.

John Oliver must know by now, he's making more of an impact on our discourse than Jon Stewart and Colbert ever did.

[msanthrope]

18. Well, arguably, he asked a question that I simply cannot believe Snowden's lawyers allowed him to

answer---

Did you read all the documents you handed over?

[zebonaut]

4. This horrible mess can be solved through the Penis Privacy Act of 2015

[valerief]

6. Of course, vaginas are and always will be the province of Republican rule. nt

[valerief]

5. His show last night was out of the park great. Yeah, get people

to worry about their dick pics being exposed and they'll care about privacy.

[Cryptoad]

7. I loved that part where Comrade Snowden admitted

that he didn't personally know what was in all the documents that he released....... geeez... No wonder he doesn't think he is a traitor,,, he doesn't have enough sense to know!

[truebrit71]

10. "Comrade Snowden"?

How's your gal doing with her own little e-mail problem? Maybe she should ask the NSA for the back-up copies of all of the e-mails she deleted, yes?

[Cryptoad]

12. She seems to be doing alot better than,,,

the only other candidate in the race Ted Cruz..... is he your man?

[truebrit71]

13. Where do you see my Ted Cruz banner?

I just re-watched the interview. Edward Snowden didn't say what you said he did. In fact he said pretty much the opposite.

[Cryptoad]

28. He said

he has not read all the documents in the files he release...... he may have assumed but you can't "know" unless you have read them........No i didn't see a Ted BAnner thats why I asked..... so you have no candidate in the race?

[truebrit71]

30. "I have evaluated ALL of the documents in the archive".

That's what he ACTUALLY said.

[Cryptoad]

31. And that is

a Bullshit answer to the Q of have you read them all...... "evaluated",,,,,what thefuck does that mean,,,,,, that does not mean you know what is in the documents.... its a guess ,,, an assumption at best... but I got my money on Bull Shit!

[truebrit71]

32. It means, contrary to your assertion, that he DID know what was in those documents...

...and that he came nowhere close to "admitting he had no idea" as you falsely suggested.

So yes, what you said is complete Bullshit....

[Cryptoad]

34. yea,,,,

i can evaluate them sitting right here at my desk,,,, and I have never read them.... geeez... just make it up as you go!

[truebrit71]

38. As you continue to do...

[wildbilln864]

55. stop projecting please! n/t

[Cryptoad]

59. "projecting"?

that one of those words that the RW bloggers like to use..... ummmmmm?

[wildbilln864]

62. I think everyone uses it when it's appropriate.

like in this case.

[rep the dems]

65. Sorry, you're wrong on this one

He very clearly dodged the question so as not to admit that no, he did not know just what he was releasing. It was also clearly demonstrated that his assumption that this could be done safely and responsibly was proven wrong by the New York Times publication. Oliver did a nice job exposing the holes in his story

[grasswire]

72. I think you are the one who is wrong.

My sense is that he did not directly say whether or not he had read all the documents for a legal reason. Understandable.

[rep the dems]

73. He could have said that if that were the case. nt

[SoLeftIAmRight]

19. Wow

how long do you think that would take?

[msanthrope]

20. Comrade Eddie's hubris is pretty remarkable....Oliver played him well. nt

[RufusTFirefly]

24. I have difficulties understanding how some people can look at themselves in the mirror

And I'm not talking about Comrade Snowden.

I'm trying to feel compassion for such people. It's hard.

[Cryptoad]

26. Is that inference a personal insult of some sorts?

usually when you get down to that level, you pretty much have nothing to say!

[RufusTFirefly]

29. You mean like suggesting someone who objects to Hillary is a Ted Cruz supporter? n/t

[Cryptoad]

36. Ted Cruz supporters

dont support HRC,,, YEs if you mean like there are only two candidates in a race and someone take the time and effort to attack one of the candidates, it makes one question why?

[RufusTFirefly]

37. Well, at least you're asking questions. That's a start.

Now that you've defined the world as either black or white, I invite you to consider a tantalizing array of other gradations.

[cui bono]

50. You really lose all credibility in any discussion on this matter when you use the slur

"Comrade Snowden".

How any Democrat can attempt to swiftboat someone who disclosed/explained just how far reaching and pervasive the govt's tentacles are is beyond me. The Dem Party is just slowly melding into an authoritarian party and it's really scary.

[Cryptoad]

53. Comrade Snowden is not a Democrat

and any that support a libertarian traitor is not a Democrat in my book.
And what scary to me is so many are unaware that the age of privacy is over. It has been over for almost 20 years,,,,Welcome to the Light of the Digital Age who drove a wooden stake thru the heart of the age of Privacy.

[wildbilln864]

56. Thank you Mr. Snowden. You are an American hero! n/t

[cui bono]

57. So you, who don't value privacy enough to fight for it, are criticizing one who sheds light

on how our privacy is being violated. But you're the high and mighty self-proclaimed Democrat?

Snowden's actions are more of a Democratic value system than your posts in this thread.

[Cryptoad]

58. Seems you have confused the,,,,

Libertarian Party with the Democrat Party. You remind me of one of the buggy whip makers back in the early part 1900's. Unable to accept the change that has taken place and never to return. I embrace the New Digital Age where there are no secrets for anybody or anything, where there is only Light and all the Darkness is gone!

[cui bono]

60. No, I haven't. Snowden values privacy. You have already decided it's a thing of the past

according to the post to which I responded.

[Cryptoad]

61. you are correct about privacy,,,,,

it [privacy] is gone forever,,,, but Snowden values nothing buy Snowden.

[grasswire]

63. Democrats don't say "Democrat Party"

What are you?

[rep the dems]

64. Yep, the government can't be trusted with all that info

but the media? Meh, they told me they were trustworthy! Unfortunately this is the part no one will talk about

[Recursion]

8. Why does it take a comedian to ask these questions?

"Did you read every document you handed over?"

That seems like an incredibly important question, and it's the first time someone has asked it.

[Baitball Blogger]

9. Isn't that the truth.

In order to get the public's attention, you have to parboil the issue down to the most infinitesimal point.

[George II]

11. Too bad he had to go all the way to Moscow.

[Recursion]

14. "Did you read every document you handed over?"

I mean, I guess it's stupid to expect actual journalists, rather than comedians, to ask that.

[msanthrope]

16. And this is the most important question asked of Snowden--and it takes a comedian. nt

[Recursion]

21. It absolutely is. And that's what's so appalling (nt)

[msanthrope]

22. Well....checkbook journalists are invested in the mythology surrounding Snowden.

They aren't going to ask the tough questions.

[chervilant]

15. Brilliant

This man is brilliant. I hope he will continue to provide this caliber of work.

[Demeter]

17. This should get every possible reward out there

Not just in entertainment, not just in civil rights, not just in news-reporting.

This should be good for a Nobel Peace Prize.


There aren't enough people of the caliber of Edward Snowden and John Oliver. They are national treasures.

[Demeter]

23. It is painful to watch the average American try to come to grips with this issue

It's not fair (or possible) to engage in a battle of wits with unarmed people.

This is the great problem of democracy, and short of insisting on an IQ and Ethics test, we are never going to fix it.

Even in the Golden Age of public education and independent news, the US didn't do so well on either front. Our limited successes were due to extraordinary people having the drive to accomplish something: Social Security, Medicare, the Marshall Plan...and even now, the termites of greed are trying to undo everything they managed to do, wholesale.

With American Pravda on every channel, and Corporate Charter schools taking over, indoctrinating the generations on taxpayer funding, it's impossible to see how our struggle for good government will have even a fighting chance.

[RufusTFirefly]

25. I don't think the problem is primarily with IQ and ethics

Last edited Mon Apr 6, 2015, 01:55 PM - Edit history (1)

I think you put your finger on it later in your post. I lay much of the blame on the American Pravda. Most of our fellow citizens have been soaking in a toxic broth of trivia, hysteria, outright disinformation and propaganda, along with other distracting ingredients for most of their lives.

[Demeter]

27. In my dealings with your average person, I think it is IQ and Ethics

Better information would not necessarily make for better people.

The best we could hope for from better information is fewer ghastly stupid mistakes, if pointed out clearly by respected spokespeople.

Walter Cronkite, Edward Murrow, they had that kind of star power. John Oliver, Jon Stewart, and their ilk are the successors.

There was a long drought in between when all we had was Reagan and W and Clinton...who were anything but even-handed or anti-propaganda.

[Red Knight]

33. American Ignorance

That's the real story.

Americans have no time to devote to complex political issues. They take what is spoon fed to them and maybe they'll remember bits and pieces, maybe not. The powerful know this. If you want to get rid of a problem, complicate it. Look at Wall Street and the financial crises. Most people have no idea what happened or why it happened or who has been punished or who hasn't.

But send them a Facebook meme about "Welfare" and they're all over it liking and sharing because they don't want their money going to slackers. They have no idea what's above their heads. They have no idea of the wealth they're losing there. And they don't care.

John Oliver showed a great picture to Snowden of what he was really up against and how, whatever his good intentions may have been, the outcome he had hoped for--people actually concerned and discussing this in the streets and holding politicians accountable, is nothing but a nice fantasy.

Americans can't have a conversation about this.

They don't even know the topic.

[Demeter]

35. Two additional after-thoughts

1. Religion has three basic purposes:

a)to create a community and community standards,
b) (in the worst variations) to make that community conformable and standardized in thinking,

and, somewhere out at the tail end, in the ether,

c) to develop universal ethical guidelines: ie: make better people.

This statement comes out of my own studies of religions in the 60's and after. The loud-mouth religions are heavily into (b). Hardly anyone is working on (c) anymore.



2. It was painful to me to watch Ed Snowden, grinding his teeth, face to face with the truck-nuts and the dick pic scenario. I was reminded of this old, old joke:

The company had installed a new computer with AI (Artificial Intelligence), voice communication, the works. The janitor came in to clean up, and the computer spoke:

"I am HAL, your new computer, and I'd like to converse with you. What is your IQ, sir?"

The janitor, playing along, replied: "169"

The computer spoke: "Would you care to discuss Schrodinger's Paradox and the Black Hole event horizon?"

The janitor, flummoxed, replies "I meant to say my IQ was 119"

The computer essayed: "Have you an opinion on the new bill to raise sales tax, which hurts the poor as it is very regressive, versus a graduated income tax?"

The janitor again corrects himself: "I mean, my IQ is 89"

The computer is silent for a minute, then responds: "10-4, good buddy!"

That is my best recollection of the joke; I haven't been able to turn it up on line....probably because the computer is hiding it from me!

[bbgrunt]

39. brilliant! Everyone needs to watch this.

[NoMoreRepugs]

40. I thought Snowden was remarkable throughout the interview

he was always focused, went along with the occasional silliness - it's John Oliver people, not Walter Cronkite resurrected, and never wavered from his firm conviction that what he did was right in the grand sense of 'doing right'

[Douglas Carpenter]

42. yes he did and. John Oliver asked important questions and Edward Snowden gave good answers

and they both had a sense of humor about the discussion. I get the impression that some of the pro-surveillance state crowd completely misunderstand the interview and how it came across

[cui bono]

51. I get the idea that the idea you got is right.

How can anyone listen to that whole interview and not have the take away that the govt is way too pervasive and has no right doing what it's doing?

[ctsnowman]

41. Excellent!

[Delphinus]

44. This is so sad ...

I am just shaking my head. Tears - I am so close. Sad.

[Lenomsky]

45. Thought a parody ..

Couldn't watch via link above as in UK!?

YouTubed it but ALL the interviews on YouTube we're low volume so couldn't hear then dialogue (could be my PC but tried on iPhone too and couldn't here the interview) .. had to connect to TV and increase volume!?

Excellent interview PLEASE WATCH IT

[navarth]

46. kick for Ed Snowden.

I still have yet to see or hear anything that would indicate he had any other than pure motivations, other than some 'swarming' bloviating faceless posters on DU.

[annabanana]

47. I'm with you on this.

It was an excellent interview, and the "dick-pic" angle was spot on.

[grasswire]

66. heh

nicely put

[rep the dems]

67. I'm sure the government would also claim pure motivations

but would you believe them so easily?

[grasswire]

69. no, because we know they lie to the people nt

[rep the dems]

70. And we know Snowden once claimed that people who do what he did should be shot in the balls.

So why is he so trustworthy? And to insist that turning everything over to the media because they are taking the most careful precautions but "oh of course accidents are going to happen." It's either insincere or Snowden is just really a stupid man.

[grasswire]

71. your opinion is only your opinion

And of course you are entitled to it.

[rep the dems]

74. We certainly all are. But it's not just an opinion that I've stated.

Snowden did in fact say that and he did cite the media's trustworthiness moments before noting how obviously fallible it is. Hence my distrust/distaste for him

[MrMickeysMom]

48. John Oliver….. GENIUS!

Wild E Coyote has nothing on you, sir!

See Citizen Four if you can, everyone.

[cui bono]

52. How does any Democrat stand on the side of defending these govt practices?

It is decidedly undemocratic behavior. It is authoritarian and any Democrat who is more apt to swiftboat Snowden than fight to get back our freedoms is in the wrong party.

[djean111]

54. Oh, but "Democrat" is such a shifting, evanescent term these days - just means a "D" afer a name, I

believe. Has not much to do with actual actions and principles, really.

[grasswire]

68. standing ovation nt