EDWARD SNOWDEN vs MIKE ROGERS: I Trust SNOWDEN! He Deserves Some Level Of Clemency!

#EdwardSnowdenMikeRogersNSA

The whole world now wants America to Pardon/ Forgive NSA Whistleblower EDWARD SNOWDEN for alerting American Citizens that Our Civil Liberties & PRIVACY were being severely Violated by our Elected Officials (Pres OBAMA & CONGRESS).

I too believe Mr SNOWDEN deserves some level of Clemency for his Courageous act.

Initially I judged Mr SNOWDEN as a TRAITOR.

However as I researched the FACTS of his case, I learned this Young Man is indeed more of a PATRIOT than a TRAITOR.

Why??

Here are four reasons:

**1) Mr SNOWDEN did NOT Hire himself as a NSA employee, the Federal Gov't did.

**2) Mr SNOWDEN did NOT conduct his Background Check, the Federal Gov't did.

**3) Mr SNOWDEN did NOT grant himself a Security Clearance, the Federal Gov't did.

**4) Mr SNOWDEN did NOT Violate our Civil Liberties & PRIVACY, the Federal Gov't did.

Thus how can EDWARD SNOWDEN be a Criminal??

Mr SNOWDEN knew he was being Hired to be a HACKER for the Federal Gov't but he thought he was just being Hired to HACK into the Personal Info of Real Suspected TERRORISTS.

Not SPY on Innocent American Citizens WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE!

Not SPY on Innocent American Citizens WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE for POLITICAL Reasons, or just to keep entire Communities of Human Beings in BONDAGE!

The Federal Gov't Hired Mr SNOWDEN.....offered him a Great Salary....and in exchange for keeping that Great Salary, they expected him to Betray the American People by HACKING into their Personal Lives WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE!

Please understand I am Not Opposed to the U.S. Federal Gov't using Broad Surveillance Powers Legally for authentic NATIONAL SECURITY purposes because I too want to be SAFE from TERRORISM.

I am Only Opposed to the U.S. Federal Gov't ABUSING its Broad Surveillance Powers to Violate the same U.S. Constitution its ELECTED Officials have vowed to uphold, for POLITICS & other Personal reasons!

So in essence the Federal Gov't is using the NSA NOT to track down Real Suspected TERRORISTS as Congressman MIKE ROGERS proclaims.

And why is the Federal Gov't COLLECTING DATA & INFO on Each American Citizen??

It's being stored at a huge Compound in UTAH but Why??

Federal Gov't Officials are using the NSA to SPY on ALL American Citizens WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE just because they Can, NOT because they need to!

i.e., "Big Brother" Is Here!

This is beyond WRONG & ILLEGAL!

Another example of Federal Gov't ABUSE is the IRS targeting Innocent American Citizens for their RELIGIOUS Beliefs & POLITICAL Affiliations.

Or......

Using the IRS to RETALIATE against Innocent American Citizens.

Both actions are also WRONG & ILLEGAL!!

So do I strongly believe EDWARD SNOWDEN is a necessary, Courageous Young Whistleblower who deserves some level of Clemency??

YES!!

FYI:

I WILL NEVER TRUST CONGRESSMAN MIKE ROGERS (R-MI) AGAIN.

Why??

One word.....DETROIT!








"Edward Snowden, Whistle-Blower"


Seven months ago, the world began to learn the vast scope of the National Security Agency’s reach into the lives of hundreds of millions of people in the United States and around the globe, as it collects information about their phone calls, their email messages, their friends and contacts, how they spend their days and where they spend their nights.

The public learned in great detail how the agency has exceeded its mandate and abused its authority, prompting outrage at kitchen tables and at the desks of Congress, which may finally begin to limit these practices.

The revelations have already prompted two federal judges to accuse the N.S.A. of violating the Constitution (although a third, unfortunately, found the dragnet surveillance to be legal).

A panel appointed by President Obama issued a powerful indictment of the agency’s invasions of privacy and called for a major overhaul of its operations.

All of this is entirely because of information provided to journalists by Edward Snowden, the former N.S.A. contractor who stole a trove of highly classified documents after he became disillusioned with the agency’s voraciousness. Mr. Snowden is now living in Russia, on the run from American charges of espionage and theft, and he faces the prospect of spending the rest of his life looking over his shoulder.

Considering the enormous value of the information he has revealed, and the abuses he has exposed, Mr. Snowden deserves better than a life of permanent exile, fear and flight. He may have committed a crime to do so, but he has done his country a great service. It is time for the United States to offer Mr. Snowden a plea bargain or some form of clemency that would allow him to return home, face at least substantially reduced punishment in light of his role as a whistle-blower, and have the hope of a life advocating for greater privacy and far stronger oversight of the runaway intelligence community.

Mr. Snowden is currently charged in a criminal complaint with two violations of the Espionage Act involving unauthorized communication of classified information, and a charge of theft of government property. Those three charges carry prison sentences of 10 years each, and when the case is presented to a grand jury for indictment, the government is virtually certain to add more charges, probably adding up to a life sentence that Mr. Snowden is understandably trying to avoid.

The president said in August that Mr. Snowden should come home to face those charges in court and suggested that if Mr. Snowden had wanted to avoid criminal charges he could have simply told his superiors about the abuses, acting, in other words, as a whistle-blower.

“If the concern was that somehow this was the only way to get this information out to the public, I signed an executive order well before Mr. Snowden leaked this information that provided whistle-blower protection to the intelligence community for the first time,” Mr. Obama said at a news conference. “So there were other avenues available for somebody whose conscience was stirred and thought that they needed to question government actions.”

In fact, that executive order did not apply to contractors, only to intelligence employees, rendering its protections useless to Mr. Snowden. More important, Mr. Snowden told The Washington Post earlier this month that he did report his misgivings to two superiors at the agency, showing them the volume of data collected by the N.S.A., and that they took no action. (The N.S.A. says there is no evidence of this.) That’s almost certainly because the agency and its leaders don’t consider these collection programs to be an abuse and would never have acted on Mr. Snowden’s concerns.

In retrospect, Mr. Snowden was clearly justified in believing that the only way to blow the whistle on this kind of intelligence-gathering was to expose it to the public and let the resulting furor do the work his superiors would not. Beyond the mass collection of phone and Internet data, consider just a few of the violations he revealed or the legal actions he provoked:

■ The N.S.A. broke federal privacy laws, or exceeded its authority, thousands of times per year, according to the agency’s own internal auditor.

■ The agency broke into the communications links of major data centers around the world, allowing it to spy on hundreds of millions of user accounts and infuriating the Internet companies that own the centers. Many of those companies are now scrambling to install systems that the N.S.A. cannot yet penetrate.

■ The N.S.A. systematically undermined the basic encryption systems of the Internet, making it impossible to know if sensitive banking or medical data is truly private, damaging businesses that depended on this trust.

■ His leaks revealed that James Clapper Jr., the director of national intelligence, lied to Congress when testifying in March that the N.S.A. was not collecting data on millions of Americans. (There has been no discussion of punishment for that lie.)

■ The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court rebuked the N.S.A. for repeatedly providing misleading information about its surveillance practices, according to a ruling made public because of the Snowden documents. One of the practices violated the Constitution, according to the chief judge of the court.

■ A federal district judge ruled earlier this month that the phone-records-collection program probably violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. He called the program “almost Orwellian” and said there was no evidence that it stopped any imminent act of terror.

The shrill brigade of his critics say Mr. Snowden has done profound damage to intelligence operations of the United States, but none has presented the slightest proof that his disclosures really hurt the nation’s security. Many of the mass-collection programs Mr. Snowden exposed would work just as well if they were reduced in scope and brought under strict outside oversight, as the presidential panel recommended.

When someone reveals that government officials have routinely and deliberately broken the law, that person should not face life in prison at the hands of the same government. That’s why Rick Ledgett, who leads the N.S.A.’s task force on the Snowden leaks, recently told CBS News that he would consider amnesty if Mr. Snowden would stop any additional leaks.

And it’s why President Obama should tell his aides to begin finding a way to end Mr. Snowden’s vilification and give him an incentive to return home.


Sources: AP, CBS News, CNN, NY Times, Russia Today, The Guardian, Youtube

NSA PHONE SPYING ON U.S. CITIZENS RULED AS UNCONSTITUTIONAL BY A FEDERAL JUDGE

NSA PHONE SPYING ON AMERICAN CITIZENS IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL & MAKES THE INTERNET LESS SAFE.

FEDERAL GOV'T CAN'T USE 1979 SCOTUS CASE TO SPY ON AMERICAN CITIZENS NOR TO CREATE "BIG BROTHER" TYPE SOCIETY.


"Updated: Federal Judge Finds NSA Spying Unconstitutional"

Government can't use 1979 law to justify its "Almost-Orwellian" Technology.

In a stunning decision, a DC-based federal judge has ruled that the National Security Agency spying revealed this summer violates the constitution.

The opinion (PDF) published today by US District Judge Richard Leon is in response to a lawsuit filed by Larry Klayman, a longtime conservative activist.

Klayman was fast on the draw, filing his lawsuit on June 6, one day after widespread NSA surveillance was revealed in June.

Leon's order grants an injunction that will shut down the NSA's Bulk Telephony Metadata Program, and it requires the government to destroy the metadata collected on the plaintiffs' accounts. The shutdown will only happen if an appeals court agrees with Leon, who has stayed the injunction pending appeal, "in light of the significant national security issues at stake in this case and the novelty of the constitutional issues."

A problematic precedent

Today's 71-page order works around a problematic precedent for privacy reformers, Smith v. Maryland. That's the 1979 Supreme Court decision that found there's "no reasonable expectation of privacy" in the actual phone numbers dialed from a telephone, because they are "business records." That's what allows "pen registers" to be installed by police without judicial review, since it's not a "search" in the eyes of courts.

"The question before me is not the same question that the Supreme Court confronted in Smith," wrote Leon. Using a pen register "is a far cry from the issue in this case." We've reached a turning point in the history of technology, in Leon's reading. The government's decades-old reasoning can't hold up in the present day.

He writes:

Indeed, the question in this case can more properly be styled as follows: when do present-day circumstances—the evolutions in the Government's surveillance capabilities, citizens' phone habits, and the relationship between the NSA and telecom companies—become so thoroughly unlike those considered by the Supreme Court 34 years ago that a precedent like Smith simply does not apply?

The answer, unfortunately for the government, is now.

The court of 1979 could not "have ever imagined how the citizens of 2013 would interact with their phones," writes Leon, leaving the Smith precedent with little value.

The pen register the court considered was operational for less than two weeks, in March 1976, and there was "no indication from the Court's opinion that it expected the Government to retain those limited phone records once the case was over." The "almost-Orwellian technology" used by the government to capture phone data "is unlike anything that could have been conceived in 1979."

The NSA is using two weeks of data collected from a single phone to justify "the creation and maintenance of a historical database containing five years' worth of data," writes Leon. "And I might add, there is the very real prospect that the program will go on for as long as America is combatting terrorism, which realistically could be forever!"

Fundamentally, Leon is making the case that the law must be reconsidered in the age of the smartphone. He cites data from CTIA counting more than 326 million mobile subscribers in 2012, including 22 million computers, tablets, and modems.

"Count the phones at the bus stop, in a restaurant, or around the table at a work meeting or any given occasion," writes Leon. "Thirty-four years ago, none of those phones would have been there. Thirty-four years ago, city streets were lined with pay phones. Thirty-four years ago, when people wanted to send 'text messages,' they wrote letters and attached postage stamps."
A new North Star

The Smith case and NSA surveillance are wildly different, so a different analysis must take place. "I cannot possibly navigate these uncharted Fourth Amendment waters using as my North Star a case that predates the rise of cell phones," writes Leon.

No judge outside the secret Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Court has "has ever recognized a special need sufficient to justify continuous, daily searches of virtually every American citizen without any particularized suspicion," writes Leon. "In effect, the Government urges me to be the first non-FISC judge to sanction such a dragnet."

And Leon won't do it. The Verizon subscribers who filed the suit do have an expectation of privacy, and the government has intruded on it, he concludes.

In Leon's reading of the record, the government isn't merely trying to investigate possible terrorists. It's trying to do so as fast as it possibly can. "The affidavits in support of the Government's brief repeatedly emphasize this interest in speed," he notes. But the Government can't cite a single instance where the bulk metadata program "actually stopped an imminent attack."

He notes that the government could have shown more evidence to the judge privately, in chambers, but didn't. "Although the Government has publicly asserted that the NSA's surveillance programs have prevented 54 terrorist attacks, no proof of that has ever been put before me," Leon writes.

That leads him to have "serious doubts about the efficacy of the metadata collection program." While there's a "limited record" at this point in the litigation, the plaintiffs have a "substantial likelihood" of showing their privacy interests outweigh the government's interest in collecting the bulk data.

They are likely to show the bulk data program is an unreasonable search, and violates the Fourth Amendment, Leon finds. The public interest "weighs heavily in favor of granting an injunction" that will bar the government from collecting any metadata in association with their personal Verizon accounts.

Government lawyers also said that removing just the plaintiffs, two Verizon subscribers, from its database will be burdensome. That's not a "burden" Leon takes seriously. "Of course, the public has no interest in saving the government from the burdens of complying with the Constitution!"

A controversial plaintiff

In the coming months, Leon's opinion will be considered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. That court considers an array of federal agency issues, and until recently it had leaned strongly Republican as the Senate held up confirmation of the candidates put forth by the Obama Administration.

However, the opposition to judicial nominees has eased somewhat following Obama's re-election, and three of the four vacancies have been filled in 2013.

The case against the NSA is not Klayman's first controversial lawsuit. Many of his cases have not ended well. Klayman has been rebuked and sanctioned by several judges, and he has been barred from some courtrooms.

In 2012, Klayman filed a lawsuit in Florida to kick President Barack Obama off the primary ballot in that state, based on the discredited theory that he was not born in the United States. In 2011, he sued Facebook for "negligence" because it didn't remove an anti-Israel page quickly enough. Neither suit was successful.

The Klayman suit is not the only challenge to NSA telephone-data program.

The more widely known case is the one filed in July by the Electronic Frontier Foundation and American Civil Liberties Union.

That case, filed on behalf of First Unitarian Church of Los Angeles, was consolidated with a pre-Snowden anti-NSA lawsuit called Jewel v. NSA.

The government has filed a motion to dismiss, and the case awaits a judge's decision. A DC-based privacy group, EPIC, tried to take the issue straight to the Supreme Court, but that failed.

Dissatisfaction with NSA surveillance has hit Congress, as well.

The USA Freedom Act, which would end NSA spying, has 130 co-sponsors.

NSA leaker Edward Snowden's statement on today's decision has been published in The New York Times. Snowden said:

I acted on my belief that the N.S.A.'s mass surveillance programs would not withstand a constitutional challenge, and that the American public deserved a chance to see these issues determined by open courts.

Today, a secret program authorized by a secret court was, when exposed to the light of day, found to violate Americans’ rights. It is the first of many.


Sources: ARS Technica, CNN, NBC News

Trayvon Martin's Cell Phone Records Reveal Last Call With Female Friend Before Tragic Encounter

Trayvon Martin's Last Phone Call Triggers Demand for Arrest 'Right Now'

A phone call from slain black teenager Trayvon Martin to his girlfriend seconds before he was shot dead by a self-appointed neighborhood watch captain "blows ... out of the water" the shooter's self-defense claim and he should be arrested "right now," a lawyer for Martin's family said today.

Attorney Benjamin Crump spoke after ABC News reported exclusively the existence of a phone call between Martin and his girlfriend, which detailed the last terrifying moments of Martin's life as he was pursued, accosted and shot dead by George Zimmerman.

Police accepted Zimmerman's claim of self-defense and have charged him with no crime.

"This young lady connects the dots," said Crump. "Arrest George Zimmerman for the killing of Trayvon Martin in cold blood, today.

"We don't understand how he's not arrested. The family worries that the more time passes it will be swept under the rug," the lawyer said.

Martin's death Feb. 26 has stirred national outrage and protests, partly prompting the U.S. Justice Department's Civil Rights Division and the FBI to open an investigation into the case.

Florida State Attorney Norm Wolfinger announced today that he had ordered an "expeditious review" of the investigation conducted by the Sanford Police Department, and that he would be "utilizing the investigative resources of the Seminole County Grand Jury, which will be called to session" next month.

ABC News was there exclusively as the 16-year-old girl told Crump about the last moments of the teenager's life. Martin had been talking to his girlfriend all the way to the store where he bought Skittles and a tea. The phone was in his pocket and the earphone in his ear, Crump said.

"He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on. He said he lost the man," Martin's friend said. "I asked Trayvon to run, and he said he was going to walk fast. I told him to run, but he said he was not going to run."

Eventually, he would run, said the girl, thinking that he'd managed to escape. But suddenly the strange man was back, cornering Martin.

"Trayvon said, 'What are you following me for,' and the man said, 'What are you doing here.' Next thing I hear is somebody pushing, and somebody pushed Trayvon because the head set just fell. I called him again, and he didn't answer the phone."

The line went dead. Besides screams heard on 911 calls that night as Martin and Zimmerman scuffled, those were the last words he said.

Trayvon's phone logs, also obtained exclusively by ABC News, show the conversation occurred five minutes before police first arrived on the scene. Crump said the girl's identity was being withheld because "her parents are gravely concerned about her health and her safety." Her parents asked that only an attorney be allowed to ask her questions.

Martin's father, Tracey Martin, and mother, Sybrina Fulton, listened to the call, along with ABC News, ashen-faced.

"He knew he was being followed and tried to get away from the guy, and the guy still caught up with him," Tracey Martin said. "And that's the most disturbing part. He thought he had got away from the guy, and the guy backtracked for him."

The girl was so distraught after the killing that she spent a night in the hospital, the lawyer said.

"She was really traumatized over this. They were dating. ... It's a situation where to know you were the last person to talk to the young man who was one of the most special persons in the world to you," Crump said.

The lawyer said he would give the details of the phone call to the federal investigation.

"We're going to turn this over to the Justice Department because the family does not trust the Sanford Police Department to have anything to do with the investigation," said Crump.

Zimmerman killed Martin as Martin walked back to his father's fiance's home after stepping out to buy snacks during the NBA All-Star Game. After weeks of relentless pressure, the Sanford Police Department at last released emergency and nonemergency calls placed during the attack.

"These a**holes always get away," Zimmerman said in a call to a nonemergency number.

Dispatcher: "Are you following him?"

Zimmerman: "Yeah."

Dispatcher: "We don't need you to do that."

An altercation soon ensued. A few moments later a torrent of 911 calls flooded in and Martin was killed by a single bullet. Zimmerman claimed self-defense and has yet to be arrested, stoking outrage and claims of prejudice against the police department.

"When George Zimmerman is arrested, tried and convicted I will get a little rest," Tracey Martin said.

Nearly half a million people have signed an online petition on change.org urging law enforcement officials to step in and arrest Zimmerman, who violated major parts of the Neighborhood Watch Manual, which states "It should be emphasized to members that they do not possess police powers. And they shall not carry weapons or pursue vehicles."

There are about 22,000 registered watch groups nationwide, and Zimmerman was not part of a registered group, which police were not aware of at the time of Martin's killing, said Chris Tutko, the director of the National Neighborhood Watch program.

Protests have played out in the Florida town all week with a large gathering expected Thursday.


View Larger Map


Sources: ABC News, CNN, Youtube, Google Maps

Chuck Schumer Calls Flight Attendant The "B" Word

Schumer Has a Flight to forget

Sen. Chuck Schumer loves the sound of his own voice, but it carried a bit farther than he might have liked on the US Airways shuttle from New York to Washington on Sunday.

According to a House Republican aide who happened to be seated nearby, the notoriously chatty New York Democrat referred to a flight attendant as a “bitch” after she ordered him to turn off his phone before takeoff.

Schumer and his seatmate, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), were chatting on their phones before takeoff when an announcement indicated that it was time to turn off the phones.

Both senators kept talking.

According to the GOP aide, a flight attendant then approached Schumer and told him the entire plane was waiting on him to shut down his phone.

Schumer asked if he could finish his conversation. When the flight attendant said “no,” Schumer ended his call but continued to argue his case.

He said he was entitled to keep his phone on until the cabin door was closed. The flight attendant said he was obliged to turn it off whenever a flight attendant asked.

“He argued with her about the rule,” the source said. “She said she doesn’t make the rules, she just follows them.”

When the flight attendant walked away, the witness says Schumer turned to Gillibrand and uttered the B-word.

“The senator made an off-the-cuff comment under his breath that he shouldn’t have made, and he regrets it,” Schumer spokesman Brian Fallon told Shenanigans.

Ironically, Schumer has been a friend of US Airways flight attendants of late, lobbying company chairman and CEO Doug Parker on their behalf after several of them asked the senator to help keep them based at LaGuardia.

Through her office, Gillibrand said Schumer was “polite” with the flight attendant Sunday and “turned off his phone when asked to.”

But moments after the flight attendant had told Schumer to shut it off, the phone rang again.

“It’s Harry Reid calling,” the source quoted Schumer as saying. “I guess health care will have to wait until we land.”



View Larger Map


Sources: Politico, Google Maps

White House, Congress Mulls Severe Restrictions For Mobile Phone Usage While Driving

(As Congress mulls a federal ban on texting while driving, hundreds of experts gather at a two-day summit to discuss ways to prevent the hazards of distracted driving. NBC’s Tom Costello reports.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

(Linda Mulkey, whose daughter Lauren was killed by a driver distracted by texting, talks about her loss and what she has done to convince people to pay attention on the roads.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Drivers yakking or texting may see new limits

With more drivers yakking on their cellphones or texting from behind the wheel, the Obama administration is taking its first hard look at U.S. highway hazards with an eye toward potential new restrictions on using mobile devices while driving.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood is kicking off a two-day summit on Wednesday involving researchers, automakers, safety advocates and lawmakers to find ways of preventing distracted driving from leading to widespread deaths and injuries.

LaHood said he plans to make recommendations Thursday on ways federal and state governments, as well as safety groups can address the distractions, pointing to previous approaches for drunken driving and seat belts.

Ultimately, LaHood said, he wants the summit to set "the stage for finding ways to eliminate texting while driving."

"You see people texting and driving and using cell phones and driving everywhere you go, even in places where it's outlawed like Washington, D.C. We feel a very strong obligation to point to incidents where people have been killed or where serious injury has occurred," LaHood said.

Some seek nationwide ban

Eighteen states and the U.S. capital have passed laws making texting while driving illegal and seven states and the district have banned driving while talking on a handheld cell phone, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Many safety groups have urged a nationwide ban on texting and on using handheld mobile devices while behind the wheel.

"People who wouldn't get drunk and drive somehow think it's OK to text and drive — which is just as dangerous," said Kristin Backstrom, a senior manager with the American Automobile Association's Foundation for Traffic Safety and one of the forum's speakers.

In July, the Virginia Tech University Transportation Institute found that when drivers of heavy trucks texted, their collision risk was 23 times greater. Dialing a cell phone and using or reaching for an electronic device increased risk of collision about six times in cars and trucks.

The Virginia Tech researchers found the risks of texting generally applied to all drivers, not just truckers. A separate report by Car and Driver magazine found that texting and driving is more dangerous than drunken driving.

Congress is watching

Congress is watching closely. Sen. Charles Schumer, a Democrat who will address the summit, and other Democrats introduced legislation in July that would require states to ban texting or e-mailing while operating a moving vehicle or lose 25 percent of their annual federal highway funding. The Obama administration has not taken a position on the bill.

Transportation officials will try to develop a consensus on the roadway hazards and hear warnings from young adults who caused car accidents because they were texting while driving.

Some groups want tough laws on the distractions. The National Safety Council wants a total ban on cell phone use while driving. The Washington-based Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety has petitioned the government to consider federal rules that restrict talking and texting by drivers of tractor trailers, motorcoach buses and large vans.

Other groups have focused on texting, which has grown from nearly 10 billion messages a month in December 2005 to more than 110 billion in December 2008, according to CTIA — The Wireless Association, the cellular phone industry's trade group.

Sources: MSNBC, US Dept of Transportation, 888redlight