Snowden: No chance of fair trial
June 17th, 2013
01:39 PM ET

Snowden: No chance of fair trial

The man who admitted leaking classified documents about U.S. surveillance programs purportedly went online live on Monday to declare the truth would come out even if he is jailed or killed, and said President Barack Obama did not fulfill his promises and expanded several "abusive" national security initiatives.

According to the Guardian newspaper, Edward Snowden (pictured) answered questions in an online chat about why he revealed details of the National Security Agency's secret surveillance of U.S. citizens.

Snowden said he did so because Obama campaigned for the presidency on a platform of ending abuses. But instead, he said Obama "closed the door on investigating systemic violations of law, deepened and expanded several abusive programs, and refused to spend the political capital to end the kind of human rights violations like we see in Guantanamo, where men still sit without charge."

FULL STORY
Post by:
Filed under: Uncategorized
soundoff (60 Responses)
  1. banasy©

    I highly doubt he would get a fair trial.

    June 17, 2013 at 1:59 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Joey Isotta-Fraschini ©™

    Would the "fair trial" that Snowden has "no chance" of getting result in a jury's deciding that Snowden did a wonderful thing by endangering the safety of USA citizens? Wound such a trial award Snowden a few billion dollars and order a monument erected to his eternal honour and glory?

    June 17, 2013 at 2:21 pm | Report abuse |
  3. saywhat

    If he broke the law he should stand a fair trial under due process of law. But that doesn't mean that NSA should be allowed to get away with infringing on our fundamental rights. The American public has a right to know & voice their concern.
    This is important to this nation above all else.

    June 17, 2013 at 3:04 pm | Report abuse |
    • Mary

      Infringing is the word I would use at saywhat. The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants. And since when is a crime to expose a crime? Good day to you to sir.

      June 17, 2013 at 3:58 pm | Report abuse |
  4. saywhat

    How a fair trial would be ensured is the question?

    June 17, 2013 at 3:07 pm | Report abuse |
  5. BOMBO

    Snowden deserves to be prosecuted if he violated the law. He HAD legal recourse, avenues to lawfully file complaints.

    The NSA, if they violated the law, should be held accountable as well. But if they only created a database of internet posts and analysed them, if they only kept records of cell phone connections without listening in on conversations, then guess what – they did not break the law.

    June 17, 2013 at 4:02 pm | Report abuse |
  6. BOMBO

    Fear of not getting a fair trial can't be used as an excuse to not charge and proceed with the case.

    June 17, 2013 at 4:03 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Portland tony

    This dude will be shouting to his grave he’s done nothing wrong. In truth he’s really not guilty of too much Any adversary or local geek familiar with computers and cell phone technology…knows what NSA is doing......Except Snowden broke his sworn oath to keep very important or very stupid classified information from public dissemination. If it’s a Mickey Mouse cartoon and is marked “Top Secret”, It’s “Top Secret” period. You don’t question it. There are higher pay grades who make these sometimes dimwit decisions and are aware of the bigger picture. More so than a contracted clerk!

    June 17, 2013 at 5:02 pm | Report abuse |
  8. BOMBO

    Exposing secrets does not automatically make one a whistleblower. If someone in Pakistan had publicized a certain bogus immunization plan in Abbotabad and given Bin Laden a chance to escape, would he be a whistleblower? The real question is, did Snowden reveal a real abuse of power. If not, he should not qualify for any protection as a whistleblower.

    June 17, 2013 at 7:57 pm | Report abuse |
  9. Anonymous

    Fascists? The last defense of an extremist is to shout fascism. Get a grip. If he broke the law, he should be prosecuted. If you think the law is unconsti.tutional, take it to court.

    June 17, 2013 at 8:17 pm | Report abuse |
    • TomS

      Do you think it is lawful for the USA to spy on her allies?

      July 3, 2013 at 4:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • lazarus00000

      The Brits spied on the US and supposedly knew of the impending attack on Pearl Harbour.
      Lazarus

      July 3, 2013 at 7:26 pm | Report abuse |
  10. Portland tony

    Crap.....There are folks who gave government secrets to the former Soviet Union concerning nuclear weapons because they believed the bomb.was evil!. They were Spy's, Traitors, Heroes or Whistle blowers?

    June 17, 2013 at 8:29 pm | Report abuse |
  11. chrissy

    If he is prosecuted for letting the cat out of the bag that the american ppl are being decieved by the very ppl that we elected to represent us then the government might wanta prepare for a revolution!

    June 17, 2013 at 9:51 pm | Report abuse |
    • Anonymous

      When someone is given security clearance, they are to keep their mouths shut. If they can't, they get prosecuted. If it were about secret military manuevers that got people killed, would you say that was okay?

      June 17, 2013 at 10:39 pm | Report abuse |
  12. chrissy

    Yea but this isnt about military manuevers its about US citizens right to privacy. If they have just cause thats one thing but to just spy on americans because they can is something entirely different!

    June 18, 2013 at 12:40 am | Report abuse |
  13. chrissy

    And as american citizens we have a right to know what our elected officials that are appointed to REPRESENT us are really doing. After all technically we ARE their employers.

    June 18, 2013 at 12:44 am | Report abuse |
  14. Dan

    No chance of fair trial??? HE'S the one who violated the regulations of his position. Because the trial won't be handled HIS way it won't be fair. Get real people, HE IS GUILTY.

    June 18, 2013 at 8:52 am | Report abuse |
  15. saywhat

    All said and done Americans have a right to know what their govt is doing with them & to them. Regardless of what is done to Snowden.
    This is more serious than some would have us believe.

    June 18, 2013 at 10:44 am | Report abuse |
1 2 3