Thank you Anderson Cooper. 'No evidence that we could find that Snowden is a Russian Spy'!

[sabrina 1]

Last edited Thu Jan 23, 2014, 01:33 PM - Edit history (2)

When Republican Rep. Mike Rogers made the claim that Snowden might be a Russian spy without offering a shred of evidence, it didn't go over quite the way he expected.

Anderson Cooper did something that has become very unusual for US Journalists today, he announced that CNN wanted to make it clear that, other than the Republican's statements, CNN could find no evidence that Snowden was a spy.

He also stated that CNN had tried to get a statement from Rep Rogers today but were unable to do so.

Anderson Cooper explained the unusual public questioning of a US Senator by a US Journalist by stating that the news media has been lied to before BY PUBLIC OFFICIALS.

He then played footage of Sen. Ron Wyden's questioning of Clapper during which, we now know, Clapper lied!



Senator Diane Feinstein (D) and Rep Mike Rogers (R)

Diane Feinstein was with Rogers when he attempted to smear Snowden on National TV. She made no attempt to correct him.

CNN also stated that they did not know why Rogers made the claim, 'perhaps he received some information' from, well SOMEWHERE!

Well, we do know where these smear campaigns come from now.

We saw, in HB Gary's exposed emails, how a smear campaign is born.

Apparently creating smear campaigns is big business. Even a relatively obscure blogger, as Glenn Greenwald was at the time a bid on a contract to smear him was being presented to BOA, can become the target of an expensive contract for a smear campaign.

Cooper did not go into how Snowden came to be in Russia in the first place, YET.

Snowden did not flee to Russia! Snowden was on his way to South America, stopping over in Russia which he would have left in a couple of hours, when he found himself without a passport, making it impossible for him to leave that country.

I hope if the Republican, Rogers ever comes out of hiding, that Anderson Cooper will ask him WHY the US Government forced Snowden to stay in a country which they thought might want to have access to him. Of course it makes no logical sense, but I would love to hear Roger's response.

I have to admit I am more surprised to see a prominent CNN Reporter actually dispute an unsubstantiated statement about a well known controversial figure, from a powerful Senator than I am that the Republican tried to create a false impression without having to prove it about a Whistle Blower. That would be old news.

We became so used to Cheney, Bush, Condie and so many others, lying blatantly and with impunity while the 'press' became nothing more than, (thank you Steven Colbert) 'stenographers', that seeing this tiny bit of evidence that maybe the Press have finally been shamed into doing the job they are obligated to do was exciting.





We got a faint glimpse of real journalism from Anderson Cooper today and that is really the story here imo. Unsubstantiated statements or outright lies from politicians, is old news.

But imagine if this were to become a trend? Real journalism where public officials don't just get to use our airwaves for their own agendas without questioning from a compliant press. Imagine if they actually have to fear lying to the public again because of a free and Independent media they KNOW will question them!

“Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.” Thomas Jefferson

I'm not going to get my hopes up, but it's a nice dream ....

Edited to correct Rogers' title, thanks to DUer Liberal Dog for the correction.

[Whisp]

1. did he use Google to confirm that?

lol.

that's funny as heck.

[sabrina 1]

2. You mean Rogers? Who knows, now that he has been challenged for proof, he's in hiding!

[pkdu]

6. I don't think he /she means Rodgers....they mean Cooper...what evidence did they present ?

Or more accurately , where , how did they look before making that statement ?

[sabrina 1]

7. That is not the question people should be asking. CNN contacted Rogers who refused to speak to them.

They asked him for some evidence apparently, but so far he is in hiding.

Snowden already expressed the opinion back in the Fall that when the US Govt forced him to remain in Russia they could falsely accuse of him of defection, which is why HE did not wish to go there.

Do you have any evidence of this claim? Why should we believe something that many predicted WOULD be used to attack him, so when we see it, what can you do but laugh? We can almost write the smears now.

If Rogers had a basis for this claim he should not be afraid to speak to CNN, should he?

[Titonwan]

14. Yo sabrina 1 (and anyone that cares)

There will be a 'live chat' with Edward @ 15:00 Eastern. More info here--
http://freesnowden.is/
Just saw this on the early bird news.
For those of you with questions (Q&A)--
http://freesnowden.is/frequently-asked-questions/

[sabrina 1]

67. Thank yuou Titowan, just saw it on DU. Excellent questions and answers from Snowden. So glad he is

free to speak for himself unlike poor Chelsea Manning who was not allowed to saw a word to the public once they got their hands on him.

[nilesobek]

20. He's a lot safer in Russia than some banana republic,

that we have been controlling for a couple centuries. It seems like his decision might have been spur of the moment. He left his woman behind and widely traveled, ending up in Russia. This really pokes holes in the theory that he has been working with the Russians.

[pkdu]

63. Erm NO....Cooper makes a claim ...he needs to defend it, that IS the question. Nt

[ronnie624]

21. Anderson Cooper should prove that Snowden *isn't* a Russian spy?

[pkdu]

64. Cooper should defend his statement with evidence , as a reporter, abso- fuckin- lutely. Nt

[msanthrope]

19. I have no doubt that Snowden's FSB lawyer confirmed that Snowden

is not a spy. I bet Vladimir Putin would you tell you that too. what more do you want??!

[sabrina 1]

24. I have no doubt you have some evidence of the ridiculous claim or you would never, ever

in any way, support a Republican smear campaign.

They are making fools of themselves, when even the Corporate Media begins to question them publicly, it's clear they don't want to be associated with something so ridiculous.

Spreading old Commie conspiracy theories, they really are desperate now.

[msanthrope]

25. My dearest Sabrina--you misunderstand. Since Snowden is represented by an FSB lawyer, and

Anderson Cooper is a responsible journalist, I have no doubt that Cooper followed journalistic protocol and contacted Eddie's lawyer first.

And I have no doubt that that his FSB lawyer denied that Snowden was a spy. Can you imagine the headlines if he didn't?

And I have no doubt that Vlady-of-the Nipples-on-a-Horse would deny he was a spy. Can you imagine the headlines if he didn't?

It is no smear to report what undoubtedly one's lawyer has said about one.

[sabrina 1]

34. Got some links to what this lawyer has said? And the lawyer's name. I have no doubts otoh

that Republicans lie. And Cooper is apparently not the only one now questioning Rogers, has he come out of hiding yet to answer the questions that appear to be growing?

[msanthrope]

35. Seriously....you don't know who Snowden's lawyer in Russia is? He's a book-lender. nt

[sabrina 1]

36. Yes, of course I know, I know who his lawyers are here. Care to provide the link where his lawyer

Anatoly Kucherena , states that he is a spy? Any of his lawyers. I know his Russian lawyer is asking for more protection for him since members of our CIA have threatened to murder him.

[msanthrope]

38. Go back and read what I wrote, Sabrina. You seem to be confused. nt

[sabrina 1]

42. I read what you wrote. You have no doubt that Cooper spoke to Anatoly Kucherena

and you have no doubt what they spoke about. And of course his lawyer would deny the allegations, false as they are. Snowden has a team of US Lawyers, why did you attempt to imply that his only attorney was a Russian Attorney? Cooper is far more likely to have heard from Snowden's US lawyers, isn't he?

[msanthrope]

45. Still ain't gettin' it, are you?

Kindly identify Snowden's team of US attorneys.

[sabrina 1]

46. Don't worry, I get it, lol! Are you claiming that Snowden has no US attorneys?

[msanthrope]

47. Can you name said counselor? I am unaware of the brave soul you claim has

entered into the federal docket.

[sabrina 1]

48. Since the US stranded Snowden in Russia where he did not want to be, his father retained

a US Attorney for him to deal with the issues he faced after he found himself without a passport. He also needed an attorney who knew the laws of the country he was stranded in.

I know what you were implying, but the world understands that Snowden was stranded by his own Government in a country he definitely did not want to be in.

Now that we see the lies being told by elected officials, and since they are all baseless at this point, and we've seen the attempts to create a false impression, which Snowden himself predicted would happen, what people are beginning to wonder is, 'did the US deliberately strand him Russia so that they could use the old Commie accusations? Seems feasible to me. And to a whole lot of other people and has more basis in fact than Rogers' ridiculous and lame attempt to lie by suggestion, that old method so well known now that it's amazing they still think anyone might fall for it.

Sort of like you just did. 'OMG, he has RUSSIAN attorney'! Lol. As I said, I 'get' it.
v

[msanthrope]

51. Can you name that attorney????nt

[sabrina 1]

53. After he was stranded in Russia by the US Government his father retained a US Attorney for him. I

know you know who that was so why are you asking me?

And of course he needed a lawyer who could argue for him in the country in which the US Government had stranded him. A US attorney would have been unable to represent him in a country, not his own, not where he wanted to be, where he found himself stranded by his government.

[msanthrope]

56. Kindly name the attorney who has entered his appearance for Mr. Snowden? nt

[sabrina 1]

57. After the US Govt forced Snowden to remain in Russia

which people are now wondering, 'was it a plot so that later they could imply that he was a Russian ally/spy whatever, and which Snowden himself predicted, back in the Fall, they would try to do, he was in need of a lawyer there to help him plead his case under their laws, for temporary asylum so that he could continue on his way.

His father obtained legal counsel for him in the US. Surely you know who that was?

Btw, do you believe Snowden is a Russian Spy, you haven't said, one way or the other. I certainly do not. It's easy when you tell the truth, you don't have to play games, or use Orwellian language, or hide when journalists ask you simple questions.

So, what do you think?

[msanthrope]

58. Again, can you kindly name Snowden's legal counsel in the US? nt

[sabrina 1]

59. Could you please state your opinion on the Republican moron who is currently in hiding, who

laughably tried to claim that Snowden is a Russian Spy?

[msanthrope]

60. Again....can you kindly name Snowden's legal counsel in the US?????nt

[sabrina 1]

61. So is Snowden a Russian Spy or not, in your opinion? Is there some reason why you are avoiding the

question?

[msanthrope]

62. I never answer your questions. Tell me the name of Snowden's attorney, Sabrina!!!

Come on!! Cough it up baby!!!

[sabrina 1]

65. Why don't you tell us the name of Snowden's attorney, I know you're dying to and we all know why!

I know this shouldn't make me laugh as much it is does, but I can't help myself.

So back to my question. Do you believe the Republican's like that Snowden is a Russian Spy or not?

[msanthrope]

83. Just tell us the name of.Mr. Snowden's American attorney. You seem to know it! nt

[riderinthestorm]

72. What s wrong with you? You can't find the answers yourself?

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3764560/

"I've been fortunate to work with an international team of lawyers..."


"The ACLU is playing a coordinating role to ensure he receives appropriate legal representation and advice. "

So he has a team of lawyers. Yes he has one in Russia plus all the rest being coordinated by the ACLU. He's got so many different areas that need specialist attention - from someone skilled in dealing with the espionage charges in the US, passport and international transit issues, asylum issues, etc etc.

But you knew that

[bobduca]

80. most aptly named

bogger ever.

[msanthrope]

84. Do you have the name of Mr. Snowden's American attorney? nt

[riderinthestorm]

87. The ACLU has taken his case. I've already given a link about that

When he gets into a court in the US (if ever), the ACLU specialist for that particular arena will come forward.

He also has an attorney in Russia since he's stuck there. Are you really implying that theres a whole stable of US attorneys licensed to practice in Russia and the US that Snowden could select from?

[msanthrope]

88. The ACLU has not been retained by Mr. Snowden, nor have they entered an appearance

for him on the federal docket. Again...do you have the name of the ACLU attorney you claim is his attorney?

[riderinthestorm]

90. Nobody has appeared in federal court for Snowden

That doesn't mean the ACLU isn't working on his behalf here in the US

o.dailycaller.com/all/2013-12-29-aclu-on-possible-edward-snowden-return-amnesty-is-not-a-dirty-word

The ACLU is acting as his legal team. They've been on tv defending him and in the media.

But you knew that

[msanthrope]

93. You're now citing Tucker Carlson???? Fail..and lemme 'splain something to you....

when you are retained by a client that has an extant federal charge against them, you let the court and the prosecutors know. you do this by filing a legal document called an 'appearance.'.

No one has done that for Mr Snowden.

[msanthrope]

82. Again...kindly give me the name of Mr. Snowden's American lawyer.

What you've given me is a whole lot of people denying representation, or people giving legal advice, but no one Mr. Snowden has retained here in America.

Kindly provide us with a name.

[sabrina 1]

86. Of course she knew and probably had a couple of links ready to try to discredit them. Isn't

it odd that we have people on this forum who are more likely to give credit to an obviously lying Republican than to a Whistle-blower.

[msanthrope]

89. Kindly tell us the name of Mr. Snowden's American attorney, please. nt

[Luminous Animal]

91. Benjamin Wizner and Jessica Radack. Wizner is with the ACLU and Radack, a whistleblower herself...

represented Thomas Drake.

[msanthrope]

94. Do you have a link to support that??? nt

[sabrina 1]

97. Why did the US Government strand Snowden in Russia?

And why don't you tell us who in the US has represented him since everyone knows you know ....

[msanthrope]

98. Sabrina, I don't answer your questions. you earned the honor of being the only DUer whose

questions I do not answer. and it's really only fair since you seem incapable of answering the simplest of mine.

if you can't back up your clanim simply admit it and move on.... no biggie.

[sabrina 1]

99. You do answer my questions. See the previous sub thread. It's the other way around, I don't answer

yours because I don't play your games. Understand now? I know you know the answer to your own question which makes your questions disingenuous. I don't answer disingenuous questions. You should know that by now.

You attempted to smear Snowden by implying he 'hired a Russian Attorney'. Yes, of course he did. AND you knew exactly why that was necessary, didn't you? The US Government stranded him in Russia where he had no legal representation, had no idea what his legal status might be and like every other US Citizen who finds themselves stranded in a foreign country, had no alternative BUT to hire a lawyer who could practice law in the country he was forced by the US Government to remain in.

But you tried to attach some nefarious reason to the situation when in fact you knew that no US Attorney could represent him in Russia where the US Government forced him to be.

I simply refused to play your game until you answered the relevant question, and acknowledge the FACTS of the situation.

Here they are again. THE USE GOVERNMENT STRANDED SNOWDEN IN RUSSIA where no US attorney could represent him, just as no Russian Attorney could represent a Russian citizen here in the US.

Stop playing games and just answer the question. Seriously, you're not very good at it, which is okay, but you need to know that.

[riderinthestorm]

101. I provided a link to Wizner in my post which you have ignored

http://o.dailycaller.com/all/2013-12-29-aclu-on-possible-edward-snowden-return-amnesty-is-not-a-dirty-word

[msanthrope]

102. Yeah...I don't click on the malware at Tucker Carlson's site. Do you have an actual.cite. nt

[riderinthestorm]

103. You're provided a link and won't open it? Then want to claim ignorance?

Whatever. Sabrina's right. You don't really want to know and want to exist in willful ignorance.

Here's another link although I doubt you'll comment or respond to this one either.

Good night.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024383928

Im done here. I won't be back on until Sunday earliest.

[bobduca]

104. 'willful ignorance' is spot on.

The only solution is to ignore those posters who are clearly dishonest participants in this 'discussion' board.

Stealing this great Upton Sinclair quote:

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

[riderinthestorm]

95. Crickets. I guess if the answer doesn't come from Sabrina. ..?

Its as though Google is too.hard for certain misanthrope....

[msanthrope]

96. Um...you need to refresh your page more often...not only did I answer,

I'm still waiting for citation that they have actually been retained. neither attorney named is a criminal defense attorney nor do they appear on the docket.

[riderinthestorm]

100. You've been provided with links

Nobody can appear for him on the docket.

Nobody knows if he's going to need a criminal defense attorney. Not even you. Nobody knows exactly what kind of lawyer Snowden is going to need so for now the ACLU (Wizner) is who he's got, plus his attorney in Russia.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024383928

Sabrina's right. No amount of trying to answer you will suffice. You're deliberately ignoring the evidence right in front of you.

[sabrina 1]

105. It's a game, which I have always refused to play. And each time when someone provides the supposed

'I don't know so you tell me' info, the game is exposed. The game was, just to be clear, to apply nefarious reasons to Snowden's having to retain an Attorney in Russia, and this is the important part which they have been trying so hard to cover up, THE US GOVERNMENT STRANDED SNOWDEN in Russia. So, he was stuck not knowing what his rights there might be. He could not use a US Attorney there naturally, to represent him, he was forced to retain a local attorney. Msnthrope attempted, way back in this thread, to attach some sinister motive to that, (he's a Russian spy type nonsense eg). Then began playing the game of 'I don't know who his US attorneys are' so 'show me' all the while refusing to answer the question re Rogers' the Republican moron's lies about 'commie spies' etc.

So I played, more for fun than anything else. Because I don't truly understand these disingenuous games and am fascinated by those who play them. Can't figure out what they are trying to accomplish.

Of course we all know which lawyers Snowden has 'used' when needed, as does the questioner.

Thank you for providing the info but as you can see, it was never about that, which is why I didn't play along.

[rhett o rick]

50. Seem you think badly of anyone that embarrasse your authoritarian leader figures Clapper and Alexand

Alexander. Why do you disparage whistle-blowers and support lying Republicans? Dont bother to answer, it's rhetorical.

[msanthrope]

52. I am kissing whom??? What are you saying??? nt

[rhett o rick]

68. I asked how you rationalize supporting strong authoritarian Republicans like Clapper and Alexander.

[msanthrope]

85. Actually, in this thread I'm just trying to.find out who has been retained by Mr. Snowden

as his US attorney. Sabrina claims he has one. Do you know their name?

[sabrina 1]

66. Those two Clapper and Alexender are Bush loyalists. Makes you wonder why they were fired five years

ago. Another thing to ponder about this whole mess. We elected Democrats to get rid of these Republicans, but it seems we vote for one person and get an army of people from the other side.

I will definitely be asking that question from now. 'Who will be in your cabinet, Democrats or Republicans'? And EVERYONE should ask.

[rhett o rick]

69. I wish it were that simple. Had you asked that of Obama, he wouldnt have told you

he favored Republicans. And if you ask Clinton-Sachs, she's apt to tell you she does and ask you, "what are you going to do about it."

So what will we do when faced with a choice between a conservative DEmocrat and a wacko?

[sabrina 1]

71. Write someone in. If enough people did that, what would happen? Let's say a movement grew among the

people without the political parties at all, to write in someone who has huge appeal among the working class, someone like Bernie Sanders eg. If he were to get enough votes that way, do you know how that would work out?

[rhett o rick]

73. If you could get enough votes to be a spoiler, then maybe the Democratic Party would

bargain. But there are too many conservatives to overcome to get someone elected.

[Electric Monk]

3. "other than the Republican's statements..." and a certain particularly vocal contingent on DU

who I like to think of as "the usual suspects" because they're ALWAYS on the wrong side of an issue, whatever the latest issue is, and it is always the same group of posters. I sometimes wonder why they post here, other than to disrupt?

[Th1onein]

4. I don't know, but you can be sure they'll be here soon.

[sabrina 1]

5. You're not the only one who wonders why they bother to come here where their views are so much in

minority. What Rogers did was an outrage, but I have to say I never expected anyone on the MSM to dare to question him.

[sabrina 1]

8. I hope they bring some evidence with them. So far, like CNN, I've had no luck getting anything other

than a whole lot of CTs from them.

[Titonwan]

10. What's a 'CT'? (n/t)

[randome]

17. 'Conspiracy Theory'.

Or 'Cracked Toenails'. I'm never certain which acronym is in use.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]

[sabrina 1]

26. They have lots of Commie conspiracy theoriies. The vivid old cold war imaginings similar to the

Republican Rogers who frighteingly enough is on the Intel Committee, no wonder we are, as Feinstein said, in more danger than ever, anyhow they think everyone is a commie, and they think that these half decade old fears are still relevant today.

[bobduca]

70. team players all!

Watch as they use borderline homophobic imagery straight out of the Tea Parties "HOW TO PHOTOSHOP MEMES" manual!

Anything to defend their boyfriend from the commies/libertarians/farleft.

[Titonwan]

9. K&R

Thanks, sabrina 1. Somehow I knew you weren't gonna take the subterfuge laying down. Well done.

[Swagman]

11. is Anderson seeking 'relevance' or is he an 'egotist' as claimed about Snowden or Assange?

Snowden, Assange and Chelsea Manning are accused as "egotists' when speaking out. Unlike anyone else from all sides of politics. Everyone else makes a statement and you agree or disagree but this trio apparently must be derided, insulted and have false claims made about them, even on DU.

[Egalitarian Thug]

13. Gloria's little man is obviously an ODS afflicted racist. n/t

[Egalitarian Thug]

12. I think Snowden is irrelevant at this point, but how can anyone look at either of those

evil parasites and believe anything that falls out of their mouths?

More wisdom from Great-Grandmama, "everybody gets the face they earn".

[sabrina 1]

27. It could be because Rogers statement was so outrageous and the Media has become so irrelvant itself

plus I have discovered that there were other questions raised in the media about Rogers' claims, maybe Anderson is tired not practicing journalism or being thought of as complicit. The people aren't so easily fooled any more. Eg, young people polled support Snowden exposing the massive spying by 57%. So clearly they are not getting their 'news' from out dated propaganda machine.

[SidDithers]

15. Now you trust CNN?...

I guess the right-wing corporate media, that you so railed about in the Ukraine thread, are OK when they support your position, eh?

Too funny.

Sid

[Titonwan]

18. The news media is inconsistent.

Even sabrina 1 acknowledges that in her article-

"I have to admit I am more surprised to see a prominent CNN Reporter actually dispute an unsubstantiated statement about a well known controversial figure, from a powerful Senator than I am that the Republican tried to create a false impression without having to prove it about a Whistle Blower. That would be old news."

It should be obvious that occasionally the truth comes out- even if- on the whole- much of the msm is propaganda (e.g. Sunday talk shows).
When proof of Rogers/Feinstein assertions prove correct, then that will be another conversation. But two things stand in the way of that happening.
1) It's classified. 2) Shut up, already because- classified®.

[ronnie624]

22. What's important,

Last edited Thu Jan 23, 2014, 01:32 PM - Edit history (1)

is the lack of evidence for the claims made by right wing politicians and those who reference them here on DU.

Like you, for instance.

[G_j]

31. ``

[sabrina 1]

49. You noticed that too? Never a shred of evidence offered. The old accusation by inference tactic

that you would think people would realize doesn't work on informed and intelligent people as most DUers are.

[sabrina 1]

28. The right wing corporate media is not trustworthy. Which is why Rogers took his Conspiracy Theory to

THEM. And when questions were raised, and I just see more being raised actually, at least one of them apparently decided to do his job for once.

But as I said in the OP, it's a rare thing to see them even question anything, so it was worthy of note. I have some for you later, from more credible sources. So not to worry ....

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

33. A helluva lot more than the NSA and their bosses.

[last1standing]

76. I trust CNN over a repub like Mike Rogers. Why do you trust wingnut republicans?

You appear to agree that its fine to accuse people of crimes with no evidence so long as it leads to the result you want, which in this case is the persecution of a whistleblower.

And you find that funny. I find it shamelessly reprehensible.

[randome]

16. It's a good thing Snowden's reputation is still intact.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]

[sabrina 1]

30. Compared to Congress' and especially Republicans in Congress? Latest polls show young people

support Snowden by 57% while Congress is in the single digits. So you are correct, it's a good thing Snowden's reputation is still intact AND that we already know how we have been lied to be elected officials. It makes it a lot easier to know when they are lying.

[Liberal_Dog]

23. Sorry To Nitpick, But...

Mike Rogers is a representative from Michigan and not a Senator.

Still reccing the thread anyway.

[sabrina 1]

32. Thanks, I will edit that, definitely do not want to give him any ideas!

[whatchamacallit]

29. Of course, had he claimed the opposite

his detractors would have used his statement in 40 OPs by now.

[NCTraveler]

37. Doesn't matter if you like Snowden or hate him...

Way too much of this is about Snowden. Those supporting him cannot stop talking about him. Those opposed to his actions cannot stop talking about him. The guys name should have never been mentioned. He should have sat in the back of class, not made so much of it about him, and let media outlets do their job with the information he gave them. While the traction of the information he obtained and released has bee positive, without his name attached we would have seen much more action to this point. The untold hours of debate on whether Snowden is a piece of shit or a saint have taken away from the issue itself. Snowden is insignificant at this point, the NSA is trashing the constitution and invading the privacy of almost every American.

[sabrina 1]

39. Those defending him from smears are defending Whistle Blowers, not especially him. Just as they

stood up for Manning and Drake and Binney among others who tried to inform the American People of what was going on in their own government.

It is absolutely imperative to question the media. If they would stop spreading lies and rumors and smears people wouldn't have to refute them or demand that they be truthful. This is more about elected officials being willing to lie rather than focus on the issue of the massive surveillance of the American people.

[NCTraveler]

40. Who in this world should care about defending him from smears.

Who really cares. Work to change the whistleblower laws if you want persons such as him to be a true whistleblower. Every second of defense behind this guy is a second that could have been used going after the real monster, the NSA. Who in their right mind would need to defend Snowden.

Elected officials lie and the sun will come up tomorrow.

[sabrina 1]

41. Who in this world should care about their Government Officials lying to them?

Who should care about the persecution of Whistle Blowers, if not the American people? Tell Rogers et al to stop talking about Snowden and start talking about the egregious violations of our Constitutional Rights, and maybe you won't see so much defense of Whistle Blowers. You are addressing the wrong people.

[NCTraveler]

43. It is pretty clear I am addressing some of the right people. Not all of them of course.

But thanks for the advice on who I should address and who I shouldn't. If any of Snowdens defenders were actually using their energy to change whistleblower laws your argument would have a point. Instead, there is no point. Those spending their time attacking him seem to simply be stepping around the real problem, the NSA. Both side seem so blinded that the real enemy is left out. I understand there are those who love Snowden and those who hate him. The guy is nothing. Not worthy of love or hate. The information he obtained is where it is at. That information is out. The discussion should be about said information. I am amazed that you seem shocked that a politician would lie about someone who has done what Snowden did. I, along with an overwhelming majority of the country, wouldn't turn on a garbage outlet like CNN. Seems to me CNN also cares more about Snowden the person than they do the NSA. Garbage media gives you garbage stories. Watch something else.

[sabrina 1]

44. Whistle Blowers laws don't need to be changed, they need to be abided by. Throwing Whistle Blowers

in jail, torturing them, isolating them from the world, then sentencing them to 35 years without ever investigating the crimes they exposed, is not in accordance with the current Whistle Blower laws.

You shouldn't be amazed that I am 'shocked that a politician would lie about someone who has done what Snowden did IF you had read the OP where I stated clearly that I was not at all shocked by a lying politician.

I made it clear that I was shocked at the QUESTIONING of the Lying politician by a MSM reporter. I stated that THIS was the story, a teeny bit of REAL JOURNALISM and went on to say clearly that lying politicians ARE NOT THE STORY they are old news.

Maybe next time read the OP before expressing shock at something that was explained to you right there. I was directed to watch a repeat of the show after someone else saw it. I do not use the MSM for news.

[HipChick]

54. If Anderson Cooper says it...

I guess it must be true..

[sabrina 1]

55. If a Republican says it must be true is what you're saying? I don't want to misunderstand your

comment. Cooper hasn't 'said' anything, he has asked the Republican for proof. The Republican has gone into hiding.

Do you believe Snowden is a Russian spy and if so, why? You didn't say whether you believe the Republican or not.

[last1standing]

77. Guity till proved innocent, huh? Accused without proof by a wingnut and you support that.

Apparently some cannot see what the worship of a center-right politician has done to them.

[struggle4progress]

74. His passport was revoked 22 June. He flew to Moscow 23 June.

... Consul General-Hong Kong confirmed Hong Kong authorities were notified that Mr. Snowden's passport was revoked June 22 ...
NSA Leaker Edward Snowden Seeks Asylum in Ecuador
June 23, 2013
By JAMES GORDON MEEK, KIRIT RADIA, LEEZEL TANGLAO and DEAN SCHABNER

... Mr Edward Snowden left Hong Kong today (June 23) ...
Edward Snowden leaves Hong Kong on Moscow flight
23 June 2013 Last updated at 09:03 ET

[sabrina 1]

75. Exactly, they stranded him in Russia and more and more people are asking 'WHY'?

They are getting caught in their own lies. We KNOW that Snowden did not bring any documents with him. He knew better than that. The US claimed he was carrying documents with him.

Now either they didn't care that those documents could be taken away, or they knew he did not have them. IF they thought he did have them, then it was GROSS negligence or worse to trap him in Russia IF as they are now laughably insinuating, he was a Russian spy.

This is the problem when you start to lie. You have to keep lying and eventually you start making mistakes.

[Titonwan]

78. Ain't that the truth.

You're a regular wolverine. If you were a lawyer I'd definitely would want you in my corner. Cheers!

[Thinkingabout]

79. He should have had better advisors, they could have told him if he had a warrant for felony

charges then his passport would be revoked. Was he ordered to leave the US? Unless he was ordered deported then he is responsible for his actions, he has to take responsibility for his move. You need to check into how the airlines works. Did he fly on a Russian airline from Hong Kong to Russia? Check to see what the responsibilities of the airlines would be if they boarded someone in his situation.

[sabrina 1]

81. I don't need to check, I know what would happen if someone didn't have a passport. That

was my point, which you appear to have missed. The US Government knew also, so again, why, if we have moron Republicans like Rogers, still in hiding it appears, claiming that he 'might be a Russian Spy, then what were they thinking by 'sending him safely home'? Either they are lying now, so they had no fear he was a spy, or if they want to go with this, then they have a whole lot of explaining to do. Iow, if they are telling the truth, (excuse me while I laugh) then they sent a spy safely home, didn't they?

The only obligation someone who witnesses a crime has is to report it. That is what Whistle Blowers do, they report crimes. Now we have even more confirmation that the Bush/Cheney crime of spying on the American people, still going on and even worse, IS against the Constitution of the US. There really is not doubt anymore.

Snowden, knowing as everyone does now, what has happened to other Whistle Blowers here where there is no chance of the actual crimes being investigated but of the messenger being persecuted, see Drake, Manning et al, did exactly the right thing. He met his obligations to report crimes and then to take care that he remains free to be able speak for himself. Manning was isolated, tortured and never allowed to speak for himself.

If we lived in a real Democracy I would say he should have remained, but we don't as the world knows. The Rule of Law has been suspended, War Criminals and Wall St criminals are protected here, while witnesses to crimes who report them are persecuted.

[Luminous Animal]

92. And he was issued an Ecuadorian travel document (later revoked) in order to leave Hong Kong.

[sabrina 1]

106. Thank you, Luminous Animal. Facts are beautiful things!

[Luminous Animal]

107. And this from Snowden

@wikileaks #AskSnowden The Ecuadorean Consul in London, Fidel Narvaez, lost his job after his helping you to safety was spun. Message for his family?

Fidel is an incredibly brave individual, and he did everything that was possible to ensure that the rights of someone he had never met would be protected. He could have turned away from a tough decision, but instead of letting my situation become someone else’s problem, he did what he thought was right. That kind of commitment to doing the right thing, even knowing it could get you in trouble, is something the world needs more of.

[sabrina 1]

108. That is a shame. I read that and hope he is in a better job by now. He is so right, the world

definitely needs more people with that kind of courage.