OT: Corrupt government

[moneymaker]

Was thinking how nice it would be if Obama were to pardon Eric Snowden before leaving office, then realized how much he hates Snowden. Then got to thinking if he were to pardon him couldn’t the next president overturn it. Ok hold on I’m getting somewhere with this. Now going back to Nixon who was pardoned by Ford I found out that a president can only pardon someone convicted of a crime (Nixon was never convicted, yet he got a pardon). Ok now if the government hates Snowden so much why don’t they put him on trial in abstentia? Now it starts to get interesting, they would then have to allow information to flow, wait no, can’t do that as information is only suppose to flow in, not out. So the governments plan is to capture Snowden and then hold him forever (like the Guantanamo detainees) without trial. Clearly violating every precept of our Constitution. OK no more political rants from me, just realizing how things work.

[spdrun]

Criminal trials cannot be commenced in the US without a defendant’s physical presence. Snowden is indicted under US civilian law, therefore cannot be held at Gitmo without trial.

Personally, I hope he stays outside the US, thumbing his nose at us and occasionally flicking a booger until he either is pardoned or dies of natural causes at a ripe old age.

[Myriad]

Why would the government pardon Snowden. He took highly classified information (Secret & Top Secret) and took it to a foreign country. That more or less equates to espionage.
If he had stayed in the US, the I think a case could be made, but at this point, we have no idea how much info he provided the Russians.

[spdrun]

Well then let him stay outside the US. The service that he did by exposing illegal spying more than outweighs the other thing.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=spdrun]

Personally, I hope he stays outside the US, thumbing his nose at us and occasionally flicking a booger until he either is pardoned or dies of natural causes at a ripe old age.[/quote]

At least 1/2 the population believes that Snowden is a traitor. So it’s not like Obama can easily pardon him. Such a pardon would label Democrats as weak on terrorism and foreign policy for decades.

The problem with such a life abroad is that you can’t live a normal life, of the establishment, owning property, etc… It’s a life on the run.

It wouldn’t be so bad for Snowden if Russia gave him citizenship and a Russian institution gave him a fellowship with a secure source of income. He could become a guest commentator on the USA, on RT. Is he qualified or is he just a rogue computer geek?

It also depends how bad our secret services want to get Snowden. Leave him alone, or try to snatch him? Some US criminals, like Roman Polanski, have lived abroad very well.

The US supports foreign dissidents through government agencies and private organizations; but we’re not used to having dissidents of our own. That’s the privilege of asymmetrical power, where we hold greater power.

[spdrun]

Half the American population (more actually) are stupid sheep.

[FlyerInHi]

Moneymaker, you caused me to read more about the Nixon pardon on wikipedia.
Ford issued a proclamation pardoning Nixon for crimes he had or may have commited and that was the end of it.

I don’t think future president can reverse a pardon.

Wikipedia mentioned something about accepting the pardon, Is acceptance necessary? I’m not clear how that works, but I’d be interested in understanding the legal mechanics.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=spdrun]Half the American population (more actually) are stupid sheep.[/quote]

I believe the “average” person is only concerned about our own power. They are not interested in universal principles. So if we bomb and kill people, or spy on others, or operate extra judicially, it’s always righteous. But anything that affects our power is always wrong.

[paramount]

And at least half of the population believed the youtube story.

[NotCranky]

[quote=paramount]And at least half of the population believed the youtube story.[/quote]
What is the youtube story?

[moneymaker]

[quote=FlyerInHi]Moneymaker, you caused me to read more about the Nixon pardon on wikipedia.
Ford issued a proclamation pardoning Nixon for crimes he had or may have commited and that was the end of it.

I don’t think future president can reverse a pardon.

Wikipedia mentioned something about accepting the pardon, Is acceptance necessary? I’m not clear how that works, but I’d be interested in understanding the legal mechanics.[/quote]

According to what I read in order to be pardoned you actually have to be convicted of something first, he was never convicted that I know of.

Did you know that Congress has not jailed anybody for contempt since 1934? Might be time to do it again. I’m talking about the drug gauging thing.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=moneymaker]
According to what I read in order to be pardoned you actually have to be convicted of something first, he was never convicted that I know of.
[/quote]

I think that the presidential pardon worked in conjunction with prosecutorial discretion. When Ford issued his proclamation of pardon, all prosecutorial activities ceased.

I would love for the press to be more technically and legally exact when they report stories. Oftentimes, they leave out very important aspects of stories.

[FlyerInHi]

What about Julian Asange? Should he be freed as the UN group declared?

Ecuador’s embassy as refuge is interesting. I know a Jewish family from Ecuador. They told me that when their parents fled Hungary back in the 40s only Ecuador gave them visas. As the kids grew up, they all relocated to the USA or Western Europe. Now, there are about 200 jewish familles left in Quito.

[paramount]

List of some of the Unconstitutional Agencies:

Department of Education
Department of Energy
National Labor Relations Board
EPA

[spdrun]

EPA? Ever heard of the Santa Susana laboratory? In the 50s, they had a reactor meltdown 30 miles WNW from downtown LA, and burned barrels of rad waste, again in open air. The prevailing winds blow towards LA of course.

How about the Cuyahoga River in Cleveland being so polluted with oil and solvents that its surface caught fire? Love Canal? Dioxin waste dump sold off to build a school and houses.

Anyone who believes that private industry will regulate itself enough to keep a clean environment is kidding him/herself.

Department of Energy exists largely to regulate nuclear power in the US. Do we really want to end up with private industry building reactors to the cheapest spec? When that happens, see also: Chernobyl.

All those industries might need reforming (in particular bringing EPA and EU auto standards into line so world-market cars can be sold in US), but they’re useful.

[Author]

Posts