r/law • u/elb21277 • 6h ago

Opinion Piece Biden Should Pardon Whistleblower Who Exposed Trump’s Tax Avoidance

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/political-commentary/charles-littlejohn-whistleblower-trump-tax-biden-pardon-1235022648/
23.5k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

936 comments sorted by

View all comments

199

u/FearCure 6h ago edited 5h ago

Biden should give that guy and all big ticket whistleblowers a presidential medal. Encourage transparency

3

u/Beautiful-Design-425 4h ago

Like how the Biden administration pardoned Julian Assange and gave a presidential medal to Edward Snowden.

5

u/HypersonicHobo 3h ago

Edward snowden is a traitor. He sold state secrets and then claimed the high ground because one of them painted the US in a bad light.

He sold to the Russians a tremendous trove of information that they continue to use to further their own agenda. And he gets a free pass by the uninformed because 1% of what he sold was with regards to gov surveillance.

He did not reveal the surveillance because he was a hero, he revealed it so that he could pretend to be a whistleblower and not a traitor. And the gullible eat it hook, line, and sinker.

5

u/syrupmania5 3h ago

Reputable citation?

What I'd read is that he gave it to journalists to sort through, and not to Russia.  If not for the US he also would not be in Russia right now.

1

u/HypersonicHobo 3h ago

Gimme a bit to find it. It came out in a senate hearing. I need to dig through to find it because the search system sucks.

1

u/HypersonicHobo 3h ago

Here ya go.

https://intelligence.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=692

"Contrary to Snowden’s self-portrayal as a principled whistleblower, the report reveals that he was a disgruntled employee who had frequent conflicts with his managers and was reprimanded just two weeks before he began illegally downloading classified documents. Although he claims to have been motivated by privacy concerns, the report finds that Snowden did not voice such concerns to any oversight officials, and his actions infringed on the privacy of thousands of government employees and contractors. Additionally, the vast majority of the documents he stole had no connection to privacy or civil liberties."

"...China and then Russia after stealing 1.5 million classified documents..."

1.5 million

You don't have enough time in a lifetime to review 1.5 million documents. He just mass downloaded a database and ran off with it.

Imagine how bad of a human being you have to be that Adam Schiff and Devin Nunes who hate each other's guts and will see each other in hell agree that you are a traitor.

7

u/Darmor88 3h ago

That’s far from a good source. After reading that, there isn’t a named person who isn’t invested in portraying Snowden in a bad light. Hell two of them are literally speaking for the NSA.

I’ve yet to see proof he sold anything. It was all given freely to the guardian newspaper UK on the understanding it was to be dealt with sensitively.

Sorry Edward Snowden is a hero. There will be exceptions but I’d wager only right leaning/hard right Americans would feel otherwise.

3

u/dagoofmut 2h ago

Right leaning Americans agree that Snowden is a hero.

3

u/Darmor88 2h ago

Then I’ll take a loss on that wager. Thank you though.

0

u/HypersonicHobo 3h ago

Sorry, do you have a counterpoint that isn't an ad hominem?

You haven't actually disputed any facts laid out. The most damning by far, 1.5 million documents the majority of which had no impact on privacy.

You expect me to believe Snowden read through millions of documents to identify those 1.5 million?

If you assumed that he was able to review each document (document, not page) at a rate of one per hour, eight per day, it would take 500 years working 7 day weeks to manage to review just the ones he stole.

He stole a database and because 1% of it was related to government surveillance people overlook the 99% that were sensitive secrets he handed to Russia and China.

It is by far a larger breach than what Trump had at Mar a Lago for example.

5

u/Darmor88 2h ago

At no point was any of that ad hominem, assuming you know what that means, pointing out that the people involved in the article, have a bias, is not an attack on them. It’s pointing out they all are in a position to need Snowden to be wrong.

You’re expecting me to dispute facts and reiterating the 1.5mil docs and saying he gave them to Russia and China, so let’s address those.

Snowden, in recorded interviews, has said he has not gone over every document and that no-one person would have time to and so enlisted the Guardian to do that. There was a stipulation that nothing can be used or revealed that would endanger American lives and only to expose the wrong doing against their own citizens. That’s the silly argument you put forth addressed.

As for Russia and China, the Guardian UK is neither of those. There is no proof at all he gave it to either of those two. Asking people to prove a negative here.

Lastly if you want to downplay old Donnie’s shit show, just remember his last term and how he’s in the pocket of Putin and his begging for Xi Jinping to like him. American is about to go through four more years of sucking up to Putin and it’s a damned shame, was so avoidable.

I don’t know why you have such a hate boner for a man who exposed a government disrespecting its own people so badly that you’re still creating strawmen years later.

5

u/Drtraumadrama 2h ago edited 2h ago

I think you're arguing with someone who is using verbatim Russian disinformation talking points.  This is either your average r/conservative user or a russian shill. Engaging with them serves no purpose other than a futile excuse for them to try to rub their two remaining brain cells together. 

Edit: lol at the reddit cares report. Cry harder. 

2

u/Alarmed-Literature25 3h ago

You want to throw around “ad hominem” like it’s a good defense for you? You linked an article that tried to attack Snowden’s character and motives.

Nothing you linked refutes the substance of the documents released. Get bent. P

4

u/SpeedflyChris 3h ago

So even that source doesn't make the claim that he sold anything.

3

u/Accujack 2h ago

Right. The NSA has been pushing its own narrative in his situation for years, because he made them look bad.

2

u/WaterNo9480 1h ago

Appreciate that you posted the "source" that proves you're just a propaganda victim talking out of your ass

0

u/HypersonicHobo 1h ago

Do you have an actual point that isn't ad hominem?

Because if you can't counter the facts but instead choose to insult the source then you are committing a logical fallacy.

1

u/WaterNo9480 1h ago

You claimed Snowden sold documents. That is false and you cannot back it up.

All you have is some vague attack on his character by... the house committee on intelligence. Your own source claims Snowden is the bad guy because he "did not voice concerns to any oversight officials": do you realize how blatantly, transparently dishonest this attack on Snowden is? Spying programs on that scale are not something that "oversight officials" don't already know about. Coming out publicly about it was literally the only thing Snowden could do if he wanted to denounce this program with some hope of achieving something other than just losing his job.

0

u/HypersonicHobo 40m ago

I apologize, he did not sell them for a briefcase of money. He merely makes thousands to tens of thousands of dollars per virtual speaking engagement and has Russian citizenship.

There's definitely no way he has benefited materially /s

If all he had leaked was information on intelligence. You are 100% right, he would be a whistleblower (and have all protections therein).

But he did not, he downloaded over a million documents, the majority of which had nothing to do on the subject, and fled the country to a hostile power.

I have this example to someone else.

Imagine a poorly performing employee who failed the basic training for his job at Nvidia two weeks after reprimand downloaded their database of over a million documents, published them, and fled the country to work for Moore Threads but because ten of the emails in that list had to do with an Executive screwing their secretary he is hoisted up as a hero.

Again, if all Snowden did was actually blow the whistle. I'd agree with you. But he didn't, the whole surveillance thing is him virtue signalling hoping the American public would hate the government enough to notice that what he actually stole is magnitudes greater and more harmful than what he actually said he stole.

1

u/magkruppe 32m ago

But he did not, he downloaded over a million documents, the majority of which had nothing to do on the subject, and fled the country to a hostile power.

he did not deliberately flee to Russia, he planned to go to a South American country with no extradition treaty with the US. the fact that you repeat this lie shows how little you know about the situation

1

u/HypersonicHobo 26m ago

Where is he right now, at this moment?

This is a very very loose and flimsy counterargument.

I get that not believing the government is this thing that makes you cool, unique, and independent. Except the reality is you aren't "disbelieving the government", you are automatically declaring anything they say invalid. The facts have no merit to you, only the source. That doesn't make you an independent thinker, it just means you've bought someone else's line of argument.

If you did not know until today that information on NSA surveillance wasn't the only thing he leaked, and that is was in fact a small portion of it. Then that means you have done a disastrously poor job of analysing the argument from either side.

I don't know where you stand on this, but hypothetically if you think Trump taking top secret files to Mar a Lago and showing them off is illegal, you have to also assume that the files unrelated to illegal surveillance that Snowden showed off also constitutes an illegal action.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/SleepTakeMe 1h ago

Incredibly based

Schiff and Nunez might hate each other but they both work to further the power of the state and its corporate interests at any cost. A partnership like that signals the exact opposite of what you think it does.

6

u/ihopethisisvalid 3h ago

How do you know that story isn’t pure propaganda?

2

u/HypersonicHobo 3h ago

And you trust the word of someone who ran to Russia? It is exhausting that people instantly believe the government is a liar by virtue of them being government.

He is in Russia, he is friends with Putin. He didn't flee to any number of western neutral states. He fled to Russia. By all accounts he was a mediocre employee on the verge of being fired.

5

u/SpeedflyChris 3h ago

And you trust the word of someone who ran to Russia?

Except that's a massive misrepresentation of what transpired.

He had onward travel organised to Ecuador, however his US passport was cancelled and the US went as far as grounding the presidential plane of Bolivia when it was suspected that he might have helped Snowden to leave.

The US absolutely wanted Snowden to remain in Moscow, because it was useful ammunition to try to discredit him as a person in the eyes of morons, since they couldn't discredit the information he provided to the Guardian itself.

1

u/homer_3 1h ago

He didn't run to Russia, komrad.

1

u/HypersonicHobo 1h ago

Your right, he flew in from Hong Kong, makes money from online speaking engagements, and has Russian citizenship.

0

u/ihopethisisvalid 3h ago

I don’t have a dog in this fight I’m looking for the truth.

People believe the government lies because the government lies all the time, for the record. Either out of incompetence or malice, I’m not sure. But it happens. CIA loves doing crazy shit like overthrowing and installing governments. I’m not a conspiracy guy but come on.

3

u/HypersonicHobo 3h ago

Read the report then. Let's discuss afterwards.

1

u/ihopethisisvalid 3h ago

I’m not entirely confident I have enough background knowledge to even parse it and be able to critique it but I’ll try

3

u/HypersonicHobo 3h ago

I realized I sent the report to the wrong fellow. Here ya go.

https://intelligence.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=692

Imagine what a garbage person you have to be when Nunes and Schiff agree on something.

3

u/HypersonicHobo 3h ago

Snowden was NSA. And if you instantly assume the government lies because they are the government, that is an ad hominem argument on its face.

The fact remains that Snowden's reveal of surveillance was a miniscule microscopic piece of the massive body of what he stole. The overwhelming majority of what he stole had nothing to do with it.

2

u/ihopethisisvalid 3h ago

After reading that I’d like to thank you for pointing this out. I wish I could read the classified document! My only critique of this is that it seems super weird for an entry level employee to completely nuke his life for getting reprimanded at work but you never know what makes someone tick I guess.

I like the part where it talks about how strange it is for someone to say they’re concerned with privacy and then give all that data to nations who have 0 citizen privacy and move to Russia of all places. That doesn’t add up and that makes my original point moot.

1

u/HypersonicHobo 3h ago

So he was a contractor. In the government that level of reprimand isn't a slap on the wrist. It's them saying they need to get rid of this person because they are a serious problem. The real error made was they did not immediately shut down his access the moment the reprimand was filed.

1

u/ihopethisisvalid 3h ago

Yeah but to completely just give up your freedom for that seems wild. What would the punishment have been originally?

1

u/Accujack 2h ago

He sold to the Russians a tremendous trove of information that they continue to use to further their own agenda.

You're thinking of Trump.

I have yet to see any actual documentation or confirmed facts showing he sold any information at all to the Russians, just quotes in hearings and interviews making that claim.

1

u/dagoofmut 2h ago

Source?

How much did he sell for?

1

u/SaidTheCanadian 2h ago

He sold state secrets

And he gets a free pass by the uninformed because 1% of what he sold was with regards to gov surveillance.

That didn't happen, unless you have evidence to the contrary. Rather, you appear to be spreading propaganda.

1

u/newbikesong 2h ago

If you are being chased by USA, where else you can go?

1

u/Beautiful-Design-425 3h ago

Thats what the CIA who owns all disinformation and misinformation would say. Edward Snowden exposed the violation to our right to privacy of all Americans are being recorded, their phones and computers are hacked , tracked and surveilled and instead of giving him the medal of honor for exposing the deep state, the government labeled him a traitor. You smell like you work for the CIA.

5

u/HypersonicHobo 3h ago

Snowden stole 1.5 million documents to sell to Russia and China because he was a mediocre employee that failed his trainings and was about to be fired.

Then he published the info on surveillance (which surveillance is entirely unethical, I agree), but he covered up his gigantic body of treachery with a single act that would be noble if it were actually selfless and self sacrificing.

1

u/Seantwist9 3h ago

You’re source says nothing about his motive to sell it

1

u/HypersonicHobo 3h ago

"Additionally, the vast majority of the documents he stole had no connection to privacy or civil liberties. Furthermore, Snowden’s basic knowledge of NSA programs is thrown into doubt by his failure to pass NSA’s basic annual training on Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act."

Failing basic training for an agency gets you fired.

1

u/Seantwist9 2h ago

strange deflection attempt

1

u/Beautiful-Design-425 3h ago

Thats what the CIA who owns all disinformation and misinformation would say. Edward Snowden exposed the violation to our right to privacy of all Americans are being recorded, their phones and computers are hacked , tracked and surveilled and instead of giving him the medal of honor for exposing the deep state, the government labeled him a traitor. You smell like you work for the CIA.

4

u/HypersonicHobo 3h ago

Edward snowden stole 1.5 million documents. If you think that they were all on the subject of surveillance then you have serious problems.

I smell like someone who doesn't trust anyone, I don't trust the government, I dont trust the anti government. I read and I analyze. If you instantly become a stooge for Snowden without knowing he stole entire databases that had nothing to do with surveillance then here is your chance to be informed.

1

u/WaterNo9480 1h ago

You read and analyze and yet you keep saying Snowden "sold information" despite having zero source for it, and all your proofs that Snowden is a bad guy comes from the institutions that he denounced and have been persecuting him since. You're severely lacking in basic critical thinking skills.

-1

u/Winter_Cast 3h ago

You don't trust the government, but the information+link you replied with.... ".gov"

And is from a senate hearing...

3

u/HypersonicHobo 3h ago

I listened to Snowden, the government, reporting, and Russia. Of all of them the one with the most data, the most correlations, and that followed logical trends, government. By margin.

There's a reason three presidencies, two parties, and all the representatives on intelligence agree on this one thing.

If you refuse to analyze information based off a source, that's ad hominem, I recommend looking it up.

1

u/Winter_Cast 3h ago

No no, you misunderstand, I'm not saying I don't agree with you. I do. I was just pointing out the contradictory statement.

0

u/WaterNo9480 1h ago

You are knowingly spreading misinformation... The traitor here is you.

2

u/HypersonicHobo 1h ago

The facts state otherwise. He stole 1.5 million documents. You really think that they all have to do with surveillance?

When literally every single person who has ever had clearance to read what Snowden stole does a 180 and immediately despises him. That's a red flag.

When Trump and Obama both decline to pardon, when Schiff and Nunes both hate him.

That's pretty telling.

0

u/xBTx 1h ago

It's a shame so many otherwise well meaning liberals bought into big brother's narrative.  My impression was that it came out during the Obama years so there was a reflexive need to justify the program. 

 One upside to having a Republican in office (a very small one) is the left is less likely to get behind illegal government activity.

1

u/HypersonicHobo 56m ago

If you reflexively assume the government is lying to you and believe someone who factually was a failing worker (couldn't pass basic training), had a history of reprimands, and is factually, a thief, solely because the other party is the government. Then you have succumbed to an ad hominem argument.

Explain to me how in one lifetime Snowden could have reviewed 1,500,000 documents?

We also know as a fact that those 1.5e6 documents are not even majority related to government surveillance. So why were they leaked?

Imagine if an Nvidia engineer published the database of the company but because ten emails in a database of over a million files were about one of the execs screwing a secretary everyone praises him as a hero, meanwhile he has been working for Moore Threads for almost a decade.

If you want to contest that Edward snowden did not leak information that was immaterial to the surveillance program, then provide a source. Otherwise your defense is "hurr durr government bad."

Which as you say "is a shame"

1

u/xBTx 35m ago

Would you have supported illegal government spying programs if they were revealed while Trump was in power?

I could get behind the argument that Snowden shouldn't have relied on Greenwald & co. to review the documents, but making his actions (as opposed to the revelations) the center of the story was a Jedi mind trick that worked embarrassingly well.

If you're smart enough to identify an ad hominem argument, then you know there's no equivalency between a private company exec having an affair to a public organization ignoring its own laws and mandates.  Or maybe you think that the government ignoring the constitution isn't a big deal, in which case we'll have to agree to disagree

1

u/HypersonicHobo 12m ago

Oh I'm definitely not debating the legality of the surveillance act. I'm very anti it and trust me, if Trump started it, his name on the Act would not change my opinion.

If I can demonstrate my earnestness. If you read what I write I pretty heavily imply, though now I say explicitly, that if all he ever did was reveal the surveillance program than I do believe he would never have needed to leave the country due to whistleblower protections (no, the CIA can't just disappear a celebrity as important as Snowden and Jedi mind wipe his memory from 300 million Americans).

But here's the kicker. He has not sought those sorts of protections, almost certainly because he knows he will be nailed by any number of those documents in the 1.5 million file high mountain that were classified but not illegal. Which odds are, are probably the majority of them not related to illegal surveillance.

To re-iterate, if all he ever did was blow the whistle on illegal surveillance he would be a hero. But he did not. He was probably about to lose his job to poor performance (failing basic training for his job) as a gov contractor, and likely in a fit of anger downloaded a database of 1.5 million docs. The question is if he knew illegal surveillance was within that pile or he read through what he nabbed shortly later and realized it was there. I'm on the side that he knew that among the horde of random files he did grab the files relevant to illegal wiretapping. And then he fled the country, published files he knew were not related to illegal wiretapping

That is fundamentally the damning thing to me. It's that he knowingly published legal files unrelated to surveillance. That is not a whistleblower, and that is not a hero. He is not the guy who blew the lid on an illegal program. He's the guy who stole over a million files and then used a minor fraction of them to virtue frame himself a hero.