Rand Paul's comments regarding Edward Snowden and James Clapper

[Lode]

It might not be a bad idea to let Rand Paul know that it makes no sense -and is even unjust- to want Edward Snowden in jail while utilizing the data he provided against the very people that are breaking the law and now want him in jail, data that without Snowden's courageous act Rand wouldn't even know about.

During the days the Pentagon Papers were released the argument against it was that it endangered the security of America, and the lives of military personnel. It turned out never to have done so. Likewise Snowden's revelations won't either. The argument is only contrived to scare people and get them to comply with the wishes of the "elite." The "elite" wants to see everyone that might go against their interests and plans in jail, or worst... and that is not something Rand Paul should go along with, let alone support.

"Rand Paul wants ‘light’ prison term for Snowden"
http://rt.com/usa/rand-paul-snowden-sentence-242/

[Spikender]

And then of course, Snowden would be found dead a few months into his sentence due to an attack by inmates in prison.

Yeah, inmates.

[compromise]

And then of course, Snowden would be found dead a few months into his sentence due to an attack by inmates in prison.

Yeah, inmates.

I doubt it, more likely inmates will suck up to him because he's famous.

[Spikender]

I doubt it, more likely inmates will suck up to him because he's famous.

... I guess I should've put inmates in quotes.

[asurfaholic]

I think a slap on the wrist would be ok, I would rather see him get awards and accolades.

But the alternative is that the mafia wants him dead, and swinging from a tree. So, I'd be ok with a slap on the wrist, and let him come back home.

[jmdrake]

So....how many times will someone sign up just to regurgitate misinformation? Rand nowhere said that he wants any kind of sentence for Snowden. He said Snowden might come home if he faced a fair trial with a light maximum sentence. But if he knows ahead of time that he faces a kangaroo court and/or the death penalty or some ridiculously long sentence, he won't come home. The bigger point Rand is making is that Snowden doesn't deserve any worse of a sentence than Clapper. Read between the lines. Clapper isn't facing any prosecution at all.

[tod evans]

inmates


inmates

Prisons are filled with prisoners...Just like prisoners of war.

Insane asylums are filled with "inmates"..

Politically correct terminology tries to soften the horrors of the "Just-Us" system.....

[Spikender]

Prisons are filled with prisoners...Just like prisoners of war.

Insane asylums are filled with "inmates"..

Politically correct terminology tries to soften the horrors of the "Just-Us" system.....

Right, no need to jump on a brother for it. We're on the same side, man. Don't be a nitpicker.

[Origanalist]

So....how many times will someone sign up just to regurgitate misinformation? Rand nowhere said that he wants any kind of sentence for Snowden. He said Snowden might come home if he faced a fair trial with a light maximum sentence. But if he knows ahead of time that he faces a kangaroo court and/or the death penalty or some ridiculously long sentence, he won't come home. The bigger point Rand is making is that Snowden doesn't deserve any worse of a sentence than Clapper. Read between the lines. Clapper isn't facing any prosecution at all.

Rand's actual words...


“I don't think Edward Snowden deserves the death penalty or life in prison. I think that's inappropriate. And I think that's why he fled, because that's what he faced,” he said. “I think the only way he's coming home is if someone would offer him a fair trial with a reasonable sentence.”


“I don’t think we can selectively apply the law. So James Clapper did break the law and there is a prison sentence for that. So did Edward Snowden,” Paul told ABC. “So I think personally he probably would come home for some penalty of a few years in prison which would be probably not unlike what James Clapper probably deserves for lying to Congress, and that maybe if they served in a prison cell together, we’d become further enlightened as a country over what we should and shouldn’t do.”

I don't see him anywhere calling for prison time, only saying he thinks Snowden might come home if he knew they wouldn't be looking to take his head.

[specsaregood]

So....how many times will someone sign up just to regurgitate misinformation?
I say, 4 more times. What say you?

[tod evans]

Right, no need to jump on a brother for it. We're on the same side, man. Don't be a nitpicker.

No "jumpin' " intended.......:o

[DFF]

If Snowden's smart (which he is) he will never return to the United States...

[jkr]

ill take time served with expungment

[jtstellar]

so ya, more bs

the article is titled Rand Paul wants ‘light’ prison term for Snowden, so i did a search of the word 'light' from the article which is filled with transcripts and quotes from rand, returned 0 results except for the word in title. and before that, i noticed the article date 'Published time: January 06, 2014 18:56' and realized then this isn't some new interview or new ammunition for wedge drivers, but old news the same allegedly 'controversial' interview from last week that one writer lied in its title then other internet 'journalists' parroted in an echo chamber of short attention span retards, which i already called out a few here for blatantly pulling articles that put words in rand's mouth, so now not only are people regurgitating news without reading the transcript themselves, they are regurgitating old news.

then, i proceeded to look for the author of this article, there wasn't one. it's year 2014, and we still get ghost writing, and as rare as it is, someone would register on this forum just to post it. wow guys, just stick to burger flipping, why politics.

[anaconda]

Are we absolutely sure Snowden is guilty of anything?

[PierzStyx]

So....how many times will someone sign up just to regurgitate misinformation? Rand nowhere said that he wants any kind of sentence for Snowden. He said Snowden might come home if he faced a fair trial with a light maximum sentence. But if he knows ahead of time that he faces a kangaroo court and/or the death penalty or some ridiculously long sentence, he won't come home. The bigger point Rand is making is that Snowden doesn't deserve any worse of a sentence than Clapper. Read between the lines. Clapper isn't facing any prosecution at all.

ATTENTION! WHAT RAND ACTUALLY SAID:


I don’t think Edward Snowden deserves the death penalty or life in prison, I think that’s inappropriate, and I think that’s why he fled, because that’s what he faced,” Paul told George Stephanopoulos on “This Week” Sunday. “Do I think that it’s okay to leak secrets and give up national secrets and things that could endanger lives? I don’t think that’s okay either, but I think the courts are now saying that what he revealed was something the government was doing was illegal.”

Paul compared Snowden’s law-breaking to the controversial testimony of Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who previously testified before Congress that the NSA did not collect data from American citizens intentionally.

“I don’t think we can selectively apply the law. So James Clapper did break the law and there is a prison sentence for that. So did Edward Snowden,” Paul said.

“So I think personally he probably would come home for some penalty of a few years in prison which would be probably not unlike what James Clapper probably deserves for lying to Congress, and that maybe if they served in a prison cell together, we’d become further enlightened as a country over what we should and shouldn’t do,” Paul added.'

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...dward-snowden/

Now, if you dislike him, at least dislike him for what he actually said and not what a liberal news agency is trying to make it seem like he said. I'm not Rand's number 1 fan in all the world, but it amazes me that so many of you are repeating the info of government shills.

[Brett85]

And the Red State types are criticizing Rand just for saying that Snowden should get a "light sentence," because they think that he should be put to death. So people here don't seem to understand that even what Rand said here is "controversial" and "radical" to the hawks in the Republican Party.

[jtstellar]

And the Red State types are criticizing Rand just for saying that Snowden should get a "light sentence," because they think that he should be put to death. So people here don't seem to understand that even what Rand said here is "controversial" and "radical" to the hawks in the Republican Party.

all fine and good,

except for the millionth time rand is just calling for chips to fall where they may (read the frigging transcript) but the sentence should be capped to reasonable-light if convicted, plus he is already calling for james clapper to be jailed if they want to do anything to do snowden so you can't say he's not advocating for snowden, he hasn't directly said if he sat on the jury whether he will vote 100% innocence, but he's given enough to hint at the answer already, so it's part of the politics but to say rand is somehow on the wrong side of this would be hilarious

[MRK]

This looks like a fallacious thread title that's ripe for a mod's edit clarification.

[Brian4Liberty]

Breaking:


Senator Rand Paul, in a joint press conference with Rep. Peter King (R-NY), called for Edward Snowden to return to the United States for a proper trial and execution. "Either you are with us, or you are against us. Enemies of America must pay the price." Senator Paul stated that he has finally seen the light, and it is time for him to put his foolish ideas on small government behind him. "It is time to come out of the closet, and reveal a powerful agenda for America."

Senator Paul hinted at more disclosures in the coming weeks, including a joint press conference with Lindsey Graham, John McCain and Kelly Ayotte to unveil the "Project for a New World Reich", a collaboration between the Senators and Bill Kristol.
...
More:
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/style/living/article1359841.ece?CMP=OTH-gnws-standard-2014_01_12

[GunnyFreedom]

Yeah, there's a guy on my fedbook that's gone frothing at the mouth against Rand for abandoning all principle because he said this :rolleyes: the absurd leading the blind into stupidity.

[Lode]

The love for an loyalty to Rand of all of you is commendable. But I also read this:

“Do I think that it’s okay to leak secrets and give up national secrets and things that could endanger lives? I don’t think that’s okay either,"

So Rand agrees with the ones who portray Edward as a criminal for blowing the whistle on the government's anti-constitutional antics.

He continues: "but I think the courts are now saying that what he revealed was something the government was doing was illegal.”

So if a court says it's illegal to Rand it's illegal, and if another court says it's legal then it's legal to him? Can't he make up his own moral mind consulting the facts and his conscience?
I'm sure he can -that's my good faith in him- and that's why I still would like for him to read this, or that someone draw his attention to this matter.

Let him listen to his dad:

Ron Paul: "Obama Should Send Snowden a Thank You Note - We're Getting Transparency He Promised"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znTk4XPH1Ys

[jmdrake]

You know, Ron Paul hasn't always been fully "transparent" about his beliefs. After leaving politics, he was willing to be open about the fact that he's not sure what happened with WTC 7. Had he said that when he was running for president his enemies would have been all over him. I'm sure Rand listens to his dad more than you think.


The love for an loyalty to Rand of all of you is commendable. But I also read this:

“Do I think that it’s okay to leak secrets and give up national secrets and things that could endanger lives? I don’t think that’s okay either,"

So Rand agrees with the ones who portray Edward as a criminal for blowing the whistle on the government's anti-constitutional antics.

He continues: "but I think the courts are now saying that what he revealed was something the government was doing was illegal.”

So if a court says it's illegal to Rand it's illegal, and if another court says it's legal then it's legal to him? Can't he make up his own moral mind consulting the facts and his conscience?
I'm sure he can -that's my good faith in him- and that's why I still would like for him to read this, or that someone draw his attention to this matter.

Let him listen to his dad:

Ron Paul: "Obama Should Send Snowden a Thank You Note - We're Getting Transparency He Promised"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znTk4XPH1Ys

[klamath]

It might not be a bad idea to let Rand Paul know that it makes no sense -and is even unjust- to want Edward Snowden in jail while utilizing the data he provided against the very people that are breaking the law and now want him in jail, data that without Snowden's courageous act Rand wouldn't even know about.

During the days the Pentagon Papers were released the argument against it was that it endangered the security of America, and the lives of military personnel. It turned out never to have done so. Likewise Snowden's revelations won't either. The argument is only contrived to scare people and get them to comply with the wishes of the "elite." The "elite" wants to see everyone that might go against their interests and plans in jail, or worst... and that is not something Rand Paul should go along with, let alone support.

"Rand Paul wants ‘light’ prison term for Snowden"
http://rt.com/usa/rand-paul-snowden-sentence-242/ So you signed on here to post this on the Rand Paul forum. Yeaw I believe your intentions are honest:rolleyes:

[Christian Liberty]

And the Red State types are criticizing Rand just for saying that Snowden should get a "light sentence," because they think that he should be put to death. So people here don't seem to understand that even what Rand said here is "controversial" and "radical" to the hawks in the Republican Party.

We understand it. We actually think it makes it worse, because it shows pandering to neocon crap is not going to work. Those people aren't going to vote for Rand anyway. Rand needs to stand on his principles.


Yeah, there's a guy on my fedbook that's gone frothing at the mouth against Rand for abandoning all principle because he said this :rolleyes: the absurd leading the blind into stupidity.

I think standing up and saying that a man who committed no aggression should not be aggressed against is a reasonable expection.


You know, Ron Paul hasn't always been fully "transparent" about his beliefs. After leaving politics, he was willing to be open about the fact that he's not sure what happened with WTC 7. Had he said that when he was running for president his enemies would have been all over him. I'm sure Rand listens to his dad more than you think.
Where did Ron actually say this?

I don't know enough about the 9/11 issue to have much of an opinion on it, other than the fact that it certainly had nothing to do with "our freedoms" or anything like that. Maybe the conspiracy theories are true, maybe not. Either way, its not really a political issue.

[ObiRandKenobi]

rand paul believes edward snowden should be pardoned. but won't say it because it would hurt the cause more than help.

the disturbing part is how supporters are now justifying some jail time for snowden just because they think rand said so (he didn't actually say it).

[libertarian101]

Rand weakness has surprised even the neocons. He so delusional if he thinks he will become president this way. Again, what a disappointment to his father legacy and the liberty movement.

[Lode]

I'm convinced Rand means well, and wouldn't want to see an innocent men punished. Let alone if he is a hero willing to risk jail and even torture (Manning, Gitmo) if that would be what it would take to do his fellow citizens a favor. Look at all the discussions he has evoked, even Obama is now promising to tone down the spying on everyone by the NSA. (I think that he mostly says that just to appease the outraged public, but it proves how Snowden's whitleblowing was necessary.) And heads of state like Germany's and Brazil's were upset to find out they were bugged by the NSA.

"Brazil plans to go offline from US-centric internet"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryHy518OyC4

It's just that I think someone in Rand's position could better inform himself. Just taking more time to check out the alternative media. There's plenty of solid info to find there.

The same I would say to his dad if the latter would still not have made up his mind about 9/11. He could start with:

"Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth"
http://tinyurl.com/ox6ka6a

[FrankRep]

Here are Rand Paul's actual statement again:


I Never Said Snowden Is a Hero; He Should Be Tried (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304347904579310463077857076)
Edward Snowden broke the law. There are penalties for breaking the law, and I believe he should be prosecuted.


Rand Paul | Wall Street Journal
Jan. 10, 2014


Edward Snowden broke the law. There are penalties for breaking the law, and I believe he should be prosecuted. I do not overlook or believe our country should condone people who have access to military secrets to reveal those secrets.

But that isn't the whole picture, and too many people on both sides of this equation are trying to make a very gray subject black and white. The Journal is the latest to do so in your editorial "Rand Paul's Snowden Apologia (http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303433304579304791043726948)" (Jan. 8).

For advocates of throwing the book at Mr. Snowden, we should ask: Are they going to ignore the perjury of Director of National Intelligence James Clapper? Mr. Clapper broke the law when he lied to Congress. So an important question, ignored by advocates of frontier justice for Mr. Snowden, is do they seek clemency for James Clapper?

I suffer condemnation by the Journal for expressing the opinion that a death sentence or life in prison is not the appropriate sentence for Mr. Snowden. The Journal claims I "exaggerate" the possible sentence. Mr. Snowden's accusers claim he violated the Espionage Act of 1917 for which the penalty is, indeed, death or life in prison. Senators such as Dianne Feinstein, former officials John Bolton and Ralph Peters, and even Speaker John Boehner, have accused Mr. Snowden of "treason," a crime which is indeed punishable by death.

You claim "in essence" I've asked for a plea bargain for Mr. Snowden. I've made no specific legal judgment other than to say that I do support laws against national security leaks. I have not argued, as you allege, that Mr. Snowden is a hero. I have stated that history will decide.

Further, his leaks that had nothing to do with unconstitutional domestic surveillance may have caused real damage to our national security and relations with other countries.

There are advantages to having Mr. Snowden face trial: We could determine how he breached our security and to what extent and how much information was shared with foreign countries. Ruling out the harsher end of the sentencing spectrum might encourage him to return for trial.

Standing trial would allow a judge to determine whether Mr. Snowden's law-breaking served a higher purpose and thus sentence him accordingly and also whether some of his actions went too far in endangering our security and aiding our enemies, and also sentence him for that accordingly.

But legally and morally, the actions of the individual lawbreaker must be weighed against the government law-breaking that he went to great lengths to reveal. I do not believe we must give up this much of our liberty for security, nor do I apologize for standing up for the Fourth Amendment, which restricts such frighteningly unlimited power.

Sen. Rand Paul (R., Ky.)

[jtstellar]

look some of you college kids,

rand is a surrogate we're sending to compromise the establishment and the older voting population, he isn't our movement organizer, why isn't someone here just ever capable of understanding that? like an ant's nest, you have division of labor. make some smarter friends so they can carry punishment for stupidity

[Lode]

When the Pentagon Papers were released by whistle-blower Daniel Ellsberg the same argument was used as now against Snowden: "the revelations help our enemies and do damage to our country." Yet none of that ever happened. (Except for the reputation for the US government around the world, a world that same government sees as "the enemy that must constantly be spied on and monitored by us to protect us against it.")

Speaking of paranoia... and xenophobia... all self made and provoked.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagon_Papers