

Snowden in talks on returning home: lawyer - primroot
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/03/03/us-russia-usa-snowden-idUSKBN0LZ1U020150303

======
maceo
I doubt this has anything to do with his condition in Russia. I think its
timed very nicely to coincide public sentiment in the US. A movie about his
courageous acts just won an Oscar. Hundreds of news stories brought to light
by his efforts have outraged the US public over the last couple years. Him and
his team might be running low on hard-hitting stories and would rather deal
with an Obama DOJ than whatever comes next. If he wishes to turn himself in,
the time to act is in the next 3-6 months before the 2016 primaries heat up.

If he returns to the US soon, we will see massive demonstrations in the street
demanding his release. I doubt he'd end up serving more than a couple years in
prison. Even then, life abroad is no doubt preferable to life in the federal
pen. It's smart for him to be putting feelers out right now, but its still far
from certain that he's coming stateside anytime soon.

~~~
Someone1234
I agree with everything you said except I think it is a little naive to
believe he'll only get "more than a couple years in prison."

Here's the thing: Snowden, regardless of morals, upset a lot very powerful and
influential people. These people might have calmed down a little since they
were calling for him to get the death sentence, but these aren't the kind of
people who won't try to get revenge if given half an opportunity.

Just look at what they did to Chelsea Manning (formerly Bradley Manning), he
got 35 years(!) for leaking a bunch of embarrassing diplomatic cables where
key US politicians wrote what they really thought about foreign leaders and
diplomats.

Snowden upset people in the US government just as much. He essentially took a
bunch of power away from them, and people in those positions shrive on power.
Do you really think they won't get every pound of fat out of Snowden that they
can? Because I do. 35 years if he's lucky.

~~~
maceo
Chelsea Manning's case was complicated by the fact that he was enlisted when
he got caught. Daniel Ellsberg only ended up serving 2 years because his case
was dismissed for prosecutorial misconduct. Something of this nature is
unlikely to happen in Snowden's case, but mounting public pressure could force
some sympathy. To clarify, I think they'll try to give him 200 years in prison
but I don't think it'll stick.

------
comrade1
I wouldn't be surprised if something else is happening. While his lawyer
'negotiates' look for snowden to turn up in a different extradition-free
country.

I think he's too smart to believe any platitudes about a "fair trial." Of
course it will be a fair trial, just like manning got along with his years of
solitary - completely fair and normal.

As for a presidential pardon, I don't think that can happen without a
conviction. Can you get a preemptive pardon?

~~~
swamp40
_> > As for a presidential pardon, I don't think that can happen without a
conviction. Can you get a preemptive pardon?_

Worked for Ford and Nixon:
[http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Proclamation_4311](http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Proclamation_4311)

~~~
maxerickson
I found this summary when it came up in a recent previous discussion:

[http://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/05/opinion/l-constitution-
all...](http://www.nytimes.com/1988/01/05/opinion/l-constitution-allows-
pardons-before-conviction-590688.html)

------
kyledrake
"Fugitive ex-U.S. spy Snowden in talks on returning home: lawyer"

What a horrible, slanted, and incredibly unfactual title for this article.

Of course he's negotiating. Why not?

~~~
zbowling
Fugitive is correct. ex-Spy no. He was a network admin, not an analyst.

~~~
nyolfen
he worked for the CIA with cover identities as well

------
mathattack
He probably stands a better shot of a deal with Obama, rather than whichever
administration comes next. I think Hilary had a lot of egg on her face with
the leaks (though using public email is her own fault!) and the Republicans
would crucify him. I think it's now or never for him.

~~~
fixxer
obama has used the espionage act more than any other president.

~~~
taylorwc
Really? Source?

~~~
fargolime
To get sources, I highlighted the sentence, right-clicked and chose Search
Google for...

~~~
taylorwc
Is it wrong to ask someone that makes an assertion to provide a source or
evidence? I don't think I asked in an offensive way.

~~~
zorpner
As a component of discourse, asking for a source during an online discussion
implies that such a source is not trivial to find, and thus calls into
question the assertion for which a source is being asked for. Prepending your
inquiry with "Really?" also contributed to that note of incredulity.

Particularly in a case where a source or citation is extremely easy to find,
asking for one comes off as less of an honest inquiry and more of a rhetorical
device designed to discredit the person making the assertion, regardless of
intent.

~~~
aros
Don't make claims unless you're prepared to provide the source. It's not
anyone's responsibility but your own should you put forth said claim.

------
aluhut
Wouldn't he just disappear in one of these secret courts?

~~~
CoreSet
I don't understand how he ever believes he could get a fair trial. I commend
him for the belief in the rule of law that the sentiment represents, but he
embarrassed the world's most powerful intelligence establishment - you know,
the people responsible for killing people who want to kill us in secretive
ways.

There's nothing I'd consider out of bounds for possible retaliation, not even
a "heart attack" or "engine problems."

~~~
moe
_not even a "heart attack" or "engine problems."_

At this point, what would anyone gain from that?

~~~
flurpitude
Revenge.

[http://www.buzzfeed.com/bennyjohnson/americas-spies-want-
edw...](http://www.buzzfeed.com/bennyjohnson/americas-spies-want-edward-
snowden-dead)

~~~
CoreSet
“I would love to put a bullet in his head,” one Pentagon official, a former
special forces officer, said bluntly. “I do not take pleasure in taking
another human beings life, having to do it in uniform, but he is single-
handedly the greatest traitor in American history.”

Chilling

~~~
bhayden
Also love how they are completely ignoring the people who have literally
assassinated a president.

------
sxcurry
Maybe he could get the same deal as Petraeus?

~~~
Someone1234
What? The dude that had an affair? I don't understand the relevance of that or
what point you're trying to make. Can you clarify?

~~~
sxcurry
Petraeus reached a plea deal today for handing over classified material to his
mistress. Looks like he'll get 2 years of probation.

------
jkot
Only way for him to return is presidential pardon. Not going to happen.

~~~
TillE
It's not inconceivable. I have very little faith in the personal integrity of
Obama, but his last acts as President would happen after the election of his
successor. If he wanted to do it, people would whine about it for a few months
and forget long before the next election.

------
xlore
Does the president, alone, have the ability to pardon him outright?

Just thinking it certainly would be nice if Obama used that card on the way
out given he's not up for re-election.

I suppose he has to be convicted first, but maybe he could convict him and
pardon him on the same day!!

~~~
dragonwriter
> Does the president, alone, have the ability to pardon him outright?

Yes.

------
sambeau
I hope he remembers to negotiate in regular trips to Glasgow University so he
can finally carry out his function as Rector.

------
mousa
I'd be worried about staying in Moscow right now if I were Snowden. Whether
true or not, Russian government is acting fully confident that Nemstov was
killed as a false flag. If they get a little more angry about accusations the
"CIA" might kill Snowden just to prove a point.

------
exelius
I'm guessing his situation in Russia has deteriorated to the point where a US
prison is preferable to staying in Russia. I'd say best case for him is 10
years in jail. Because there is almost no question that he broke the law; he
will be arguing intent and conscientiousness.

His chief demand will likely be that the government not charge him under the
espionage act, which is so broad and inflexible it would not even allow him to
present a defense. No idea what other legal statutes he could be charged
under, but whatever they are would have to at least allow the possibility of
raising the "I did this in the best interests of the country, not the best
interests of our military contractors and bureaucrats" defense.

Oh, and also that the trial will be a media circus and keep the NSAs
surveillance programs in the news for the greater part of the next decade.

~~~
TillE
> I'm guessing his situation in Russia has deteriorated to the point where a
> US prison is preferable to staying in Russia.

That's rather extreme, and I'm not aware of the slightest shred of evidence
for it. As far as we know, he's still living a fairly normal life with his
girlfriend in Moscow. He could be concerned about Russia not renewing his
status in the future, though.

~~~
exelius
It could just be a case of the Russian government realizing he's never going
to give them what they want, so they decided to stop helping him out in the
hopes that a lengthy prison sentence might encourage him.

What I did get out of Citizenfour is that Snowden understands international
politics, and that he would know his existence in Russia will last only as
long as Putin needs him for. But given the increasing distrust in Russia
towards all things American right now, it can't be a particularly welcoming
environment for someone who considers himself a crusader of truth and freedom.

~~~
nyolfen
>It could just be a case of the Russian government realizing he's never going
to give them what they want, so they decided to stop helping him out in the
hopes that a lengthy prison sentence might encourage him.

"what they want"? he entered the country without any of the documents if those
are what you're referring to. his safe life in russia acts as a snub to
washington at a time when US/russian relations are at a historic low, which is
presumably the entire reason they gave him a visa and refuse to extradite him
to begin with. it's no great expenditure on the part of the russian state to
host him, he's just a guy living with his girlfriend

~~~
exelius
Right, but if you're an FSB officer you're thinking "No way this guy doesn't
have access to the documents. Let's keep him here and spy on him in case he
leads us to them." After a few years, they realize he was telling the truth,
and he's suddenly of a lot less value to them.

Eventually, Russia will want to warm up relations with the US. When that day
comes, Snowden's time in Russia will be at an end. It's convenient for Putin
to be able to use the US as a punching bag, but Putin will not be in power
forever. It's probably better for him to find an exit now and have a bit more
control over his own destiny.

~~~
nyolfen
you're projecting a whole lot here. there is no reason for snowden to have the
documents and it would make much more sense for him to leave them with the
journalists, if you accept his stated motivations. again, granting him asylum
costs them nothing and acts as an symbol they can hold up to highlight US
spying and hypocrisy. they benefit in PR from hosting him and you seem to have
this bizarre idea that russians just execute everyone that isn't producing
value or something. it's exactly those stereotypes that russia is holding up a
mirror to by hosting him, people act like they're all ruthless barbarians but
the US is the country trying to crucify this guy for leaking invasive spy
programs to the public. they get to call out that hypocrisy

~~~
exelius
It's not just Russia; when you dabble in geopolitics, everything becomes a
bargaining chip. The PR benefit of hosting Snowden is short-lived; his profile
will fade over time if he keeps his mouth shut. Eventually, when Russia wants
to improve relations with the US, they will likely use Snowden as a bargaining
chip. He's not worth much to Russia, but the US wants him really bad. So they
can use Snowden to extract something they want from the US (reduction in
sanctions, for example) for relatively little cost to themselves. But there
was always very little downside to Russia here, and a significant amount of
upside: right now, the upside is in holding Snowden up as an example of US
hypocrisy, but later that upside might be that he can be traded for something
more valuable.

I'm not trying to single out Russia as a bad actor here -- the US behaved in a
very similar fashion with Soviet spies and dissidents in the 70s and 80s. This
is why you don't want to get involved with geopolitics - your future is
controlled by situations outside your control. Snowden strikes me as a smart
guy who knows all of this, which is why negotiating a return to the US makes
sense for him.

------
shit_parade
unrelated question, but how does HN rank threads, at time of posting this
thread has 89 points, 106 comments, and 1 hour but ranks in the 50s

~~~
belovedeagle
Certain topics/keywords get penalized; I bet "Snowden" is one such keyword.

------
rhokstar
This would be a perfect movie.

------
fargolime
The average American thinks an arrest is tantamount to guilt; one of many
signs of this is that mugshots are made public here. Snowden should stay
exiled.

~~~
andrewrice
Well, technically, he _is_ guilty.

~~~
fargolime
So was Rosa Parks. We have a whistleblower law, along with a gov't oath to
defend the Constitution, that potentially trumps other laws. So his prison
potential isn't so clear.

~~~
msandford
> defend the Constitution, that potentially trumps other laws

I can't see how it couldn't trump other laws!

Think about it. If you can pass a new law which trumps the Constitution via a
method that doesn't involve a Constitutional amendment, then you've just done
an end-run around the theoretically supreme law of the land. And if you can do
that, the Constitution is completely meaningless.

The whole point of the document is that it outlines some bedrock stuff and
it's neigh impossible to change unless everyone in the country really agrees
that it needs to via a 3/4 majority of the states ratifying.

I would argue that the Constitution absolutely overrides laws to the contrary
and we see this play out all the time with the Supreme Court. Things get
struck down all the time as unconstitutional and that's the end of it.

I can't see how the founding document of our government can somehow be
subverted by other laws unless those laws are deemed as important via
ratification.

~~~
fargolime
> I would argue that the Constitution absolutely overrides laws to the
> contrary

We're agreeing with each other? It's up to each person who takes an oath to
defend the Constitution, to ignore and even fight against unconstitutional
laws, i.e. ones that in an ideal world would be overridden by a fair Supreme
Court.

Couldn't reply earlier due to "you're posting too fast" limitation, even after
a day. I may have to wait several days to reply again.

