
Eric Holder: The Justice Department Could Strike Deal with Edward Snowden - Sideloader
https://www.yahoo.com/politics/eric-holder-the-justice-department-could-strike-123393663066.html?soc_src=unv-sh&soc_trk=ma
======
icanhackit
If you make a martyr out of Snowden you'll bring a lot of negative attention
to the issue of mass-surveillance. So the best outcome from the USG's
perspective is for Snowden to go through some level of punishment that will
act as a deterrent for other would-be whistle-blowers while not rustling the
feathers of anti mass-surveillance proponents.

Makes you wonder, does the USG feel a sense of relief now that all this mass-
surveillance stuff is out there and the general public doesn't care that much?

~~~
scintill76
Yeah, maybe there is some slow-burning anger that will cause problems later,
and maybe there have been bad consequences that haven't been revealed, but for
the most part this seems to have worked out great for them. They can pat
themselves on the back for "passing reforms", _and_ not a lot of people care
(at least anymore?).

------
noobermin
Am I the only person who welcomes this? Obama could come out tomorrow and
admit he was wrong and people would still think there is some ulterior motive
there. Of course, the government has lied before, but Holder isn't even part
of the administration anymore. The fact that anyone, even someone no longer in
the loop at least acknowledge that the leaks might have had a positive effect
is a concession from the hardline conservative, Snowden-was-wrong side, if
anything.

~~~
ChrisAntaki
I welcome Eric Holder's honesty as well. It sets a good precedent for more
(current and former) officials to come out and say, "these disclosures
actually empowered the American people."

------
dmfdmf
But can the USG be trusted to keep their word?

~~~
thrill
Can Holden? ... if there's some reason for a "deal", then there must be
something important (in easily copied digital form) that he still holds as
leverage.

~~~
dmfdmf
I don't know why you are being downvoted as I think this is a legit question.

------
scintill76
> Holder said “we are in a different place as a result of the Snowden
> disclosures” and that “his actions spurred a necessary debate” that prompted
> President Obama and Congress to change policies on the bulk collection of
> phone records of American citizens.

Hmm. "We stepped up and fixed all the problems, so there is no need to
continue the debate." I guess at face value it's kind of nice to say, but it
doesn't carry a lot of weight since it's not an official statement. The
current AG spokesperson is quoted, "I can say our position regarding bringing
Edward Snowden back to the United States to face charges has not changed." It
doesn't exactly contradict striking a deal, but it doesn't sound very open to
doing so.

> informal discussions of... a plea bargain in which Snowden returns to the
> United States, pleads guilty to one felony count and receives a prison
> sentence of three to five years in exchange for full cooperation with the
> government.

Seems problematic. What is "full cooperation" \-- enumerating all docs? What
if they say they don't believe him and the deal is off? Does he have to agree
to discrediting himself in order to get people to put less stock in anything
attributed to the "Snowden disclosures"? Publicly thank them for the
aforementioned policy changes and shed tears saying it's exactly what he set
out to do -- we can stop pushing for more change?

~~~
ChrisAntaki
> "We stepped up and fixed all the problems, so there is no need to continue
> the debate."

Interesting take. When I read Holder's quotes, “we are in a different place as
a result of the Snowden disclosures” and “his actions spurred a necessary
debate”, I got the sense he was acknowledging progress we'd made as a society.
He didn't seem to imply the debates or reforms were over though.

~~~
scintill76
Well, it's a cynical take, influenced by my cynical (and, admittedly, kind of
ignorant) view of the USA FREEDOM Act, which I presume is a major part of the
"different place" Holder is referring to. In many ways its purpose is by
definition to bring us back to the same place by restoring expired laws.
People like natsec whistleblowers, ACLU, and EFF don't seem to think the
passed version does much -- a small symbolic victory at best. Personally I
worry the gov't and media's labeling it as "reform" will contribute to fading
interest in the public. Holder could be nudging that propaganda here. So yeah,
I am reading too much into what he said, but that's sort of my reasoning for
it.

To be fair, I am not sure how I would define meaningful reform, but I think it
needs to do more than USA FREEDOM. I could be missing some other progress,
too?

~~~
ChrisAntaki
Holder's actual quote was so short in the article, it's hard to know exactly
what he was referring to. ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯

------
clamprecht
A full unconditional pardon from Obama would be more appropriate.

~~~
jacobolus
Seems unlikely, considering Obama’s stance on surveillance and his stance on
leakers and whistleblowers.

------
higherpurpose
Is part of the deal to "never speak about NSA again for the rest of his life"
or something like that? I doubt he would take it then, nor should he.

In the meantime, those who leak to Wikileaks will apparently face execution -
so how much can we really trust the US government on this?

[http://alexanderhiggins.com/us-military-warns-personnel-
cont...](http://alexanderhiggins.com/us-military-warns-personnel-contacting-
wikileaks-assange-face-execution/)

Also, hasn't Holder quit already?

------
radu_floricica
Snowden is in Russia right now. Chances of him coming back to US in the
current climate are next to nil. That's probably part of why they don't mind
putting this on the table - Snowden can't take it.

------
jrs235
This is a duplicate. This was submitted earlier here
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9842389](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9842389)

------
curiousjorge
so are they afraid that snowden could reveal even more secrets and thus
compromising their "tailored access" capabilities?

