No products in the cart.

News

Federated American Scientists: WHEN THE PRESIDENT PARDONED A LEAKER

Steven Aftergood is in charge of the section of the Federated American Scientists’ website known as “Secrecy News”.

I would encourage all readers here at Oath Keepers to sign up for the FAS.ORG email alerts and visit their site often. We read at their front page —

FAS works to provide science-based analysis of catastrophic threats to national and international security and to develop policy solutions to reduce these threats. FAS experts examine issues related to nuclear weapons policy, disarmament, nuclear energy, radiological and nuclear terrorism, energy security, chemical and biological weapons and government secrecy policy.

Steven has an interesting article on the concept which I noted when posting previously here about the new Oliver Stone movie, “SNOWDEN”, that being that Stone is calling for President Obama to pardon Edward Snowden. Mr. Aftergood wrote on September 19, 2016, an article/discussion about a Presidential pardon for NSA-leaker Edward Snowden, excerpted here:

Sorting Through the Snowden Aftermath

Link:  http://fas.org/blogs/secrecy/2016/09/snowden-aftermath/

Public discussion of the Edward Snowden case has mostly been a dialog of the deaf, with defenders and critics largely talking past each other at increasing volume. But the disagreements became sharper and more interesting over the past week.

“Mr. Snowden is not a patriot. He is not a whistleblower. He is a criminal,” wrote the members of the House Intelligence Committee in a startling September 15 letter to the President, urging him not to pardon Snowden, contrary to the urging of human rights groups.

“The public narrative popularized by Snowden and his allies is rife with falsehoods, exaggerations, and crucial omissions,” the House Intelligence Committee wrote in the executive summary of an otherwise classified report on Snowden’s disclosures.

Remarkably, however, the House Committee report itself included numerous false statements and misrepresentations, according to an analysis by Barton Gellman, who had reported on Snowden’s disclosures for the Washington Post.

“The report is not only one-sided, not only incurious, not only contemptuous of fact. It is trifling,” wrote Gellman, who identified several apparent errors and falsehoods in the House Committee summary.

What is perhaps worse than what’s contained in the House document, though, is what is missing from it: Congressional intelligence overseers missed the opportunity to perform any reflection or self-criticism concerning their own role in the Snowden matter.

The fact that U.S. intelligence surveillance policies had to be modified in response to the public controversy over Snowden’s disclosures was a tacit admission that intelligence oversight behind closed doors had failed to fulfill its role up to that point. But since the Committee has been unwilling to admit any such failure, it remains unable to take the initiative to rectify its procedures.

Last week, a coalition of non-governmental organizations proposed various changes to House rules that they said would help to improve the quality of intelligence oversight and make it more responsive to congressional needs and to the public interest.

Meanwhile, several human rights organizations launched a campaign to urge President Obama to pardon Snowden.

(snip) Read whole article here please —  http://fas.org/blogs/secrecy/2016/09/snowden-aftermath/


But now Mr. Aftergood has posted a follow-up article which we all should know about. Here is the link:

 

Oath Keepers Billboard Design
Oath Keepers Billboard Design

When the President Pardoned a Leaker

Link: http://fas.org/blogs/secrecy/2016/09/morison-pardon/

In recent discussions of whether President Obama should pardon Edward Snowden, it has gone unnoticed that a presidential pardon was once granted to a person who committed an unauthorized disclosure of classified information to the press, effectively erasing his crime.

In 1985, Samuel L. Morison, a U.S. Navy intelligence analyst, was convicted under the Espionage Act statutes of providing classified intelligence satellite photographs of a Soviet aircraft carrier to Jane’s Defence Weekly. He was sentenced to two years in prison, of which he served eight months.

But in January 2001, President Clinton issued “a full and unconditional pardon” to Morison.

The fact that a leaker received a pardon is an indication that the unauthorized disclosure of classified information is not so intrinsically heinous a crime as to be categorically beyond official forgiveness. Since one president pardoned a leaker, it is certainly within the realm of possibility that another president might choose to do the same…

(Snip) Please read whole article at fas.org —  http://fas.org/blogs/secrecy/2016/09/morison-pardon/

And then come back here and join a discussion in the comments section below this article. Tell us what you think, yes! Thanks muchly!

Salute!

Elias Alias, editor

0

Elias Alias

Editor in Chief for Oath Keepers; Unemployed poet; Lover of Nature and Nature's beauty. Slave to all cats. Reading interests include study of hidden history, classical literature. Concerned Constitutional American. Honorably discharged USMC Viet Nam Veteran. Founder, TheMentalMilitia.Net

Veteran’s Day Membership Drive

4 comments

  1. Michael LeMieux: “The Constitution has very little to do with the American citizen. It was written to establish a Federal Government and to place the boundaries by which that government would operate. The constitution was never designed to provide or enumerate the rights of the citizens but to restrain the federal government from meddling in state and ultimately citizen affairs.”

    ““Mr. Snowden is not a patriot. He is not a whistleblower. He is a criminal,” wrote the members of the House Intelligence Committee…”

    What is a whistle blower? Is this not a person who KEEPS the Oath to the US Constitution by bringing to the attention of the people the crimes committed by those who serve within our governments, and within areas of power that affect our nation, the America people? Those that take an Oath and serve lawfully within our governments are required to put the US Constitution FIRST and FOREMOST above everything else. That is not a criminal action, but the act of a person who is KEEPING their Oath to the US Constitution.

    Those that serve within our governments know this (or should) because the OATH is required of them before they are ever allowed to serve – be they elected, hired, contracted, etc in every position – military, LE, senate, judges, etc. Presidents, though, are held to a higher standing then others who serve, as they are required to PRESERVE, PROTECT, AND DEFEND the US Constitution; all else are required to SUPPORT AND DEFEND it. Like the requirements of all who serve within certain named-in-writing offices, when all of those conditions are not met, that person, the things that person does while impersonating a governmental official is NOT binding on the American people or our nation. The “contract” must be kept for any person who serves within our governments to have the authority to represent the people and our nation. They are not allowed to misrepresent us, our nation. All of this is in writing within each state’s Constitution and the US Constitution.

    Whistleblowers support and defend the US Constitution from the domestic enemies and traitors as they are REQUIRED to do. They bring out into the light of our judgement crimes committed by those people and/or agencies that serve within our governments.

    Whislteblowers keep their Oath to our US Constitution, and when they are prosecuted for bringing crimes to light, the prosecutors are the ones committing crimes, maybe treason for they are working to COVER-UP criminal action against the US Constitution, against state Constitutions, against the American people.

    One should understand that the Constitution’s framers, at the time that they gathered to draft a Constitution for their newly liberated country, were fearful of putting too much power in the hands of any single person or institution, and MOST particularly in the executive – a single person position; as they had just finished the war of independence from the rule of a tyrant King from distant lands. They wanted a government whose first duty was to PROTECT the natural rights of the people whom they serve; and which the people had say without it degenerating into mass tyranny 9democracy) which was as bad as tyranny of a single ruler or group. But they knew that we needed a government to run certain things for this nation such as arranging and building roads, creating sound money, dealing with foreign nations, trade, war – if it happens here, and all else put in writing into the Constitution.

    They separated the powers, but even then the power and authority was NOT in the person, but in the position (it is that way for all governmental positions) – the branch itself or to a named-in-writing office within a branch. That way no PERSON serving within our government had/have power/authority themselves, but were/are ALLOWED to use that power/authority as long as what they did/do while serving followed the direct put-into-writing authority DELEGATED to that branch or position and TOOK and KEPT the Oath.

    The authority of all government here is divided between the state governments which ARE sovereign in and of themselves (those serving within the federal government has not authority to change that lawfully), and the federal government; with each state’s government having more authority over domestic issues, while the general government was given authority to REPRESENT each state – through that states reps – in dealing with foreign affairs. All of this is in writing.

    Then the central document which had extremely limited powers for the general government, but also was the “blueprint” for all laws/codes/regulations/treaties/etc and for the actions those serving within our governments (plural) MUST follow in order to not only be lawful, but to be binding on the American people themselves, and binding on the nation. It assigned the delegated authorities/duties to the different BRANCHES and NAMED-IN-WRITING offices within a branch. The US Constitution is itself the supreme law of this nation; it not only defines our governments, but it also separates and assigns the different authority and powers between the different governments – state and federal; but further breaks it up between the different branches. One must also remember that not all power over ourselves were given to the governments, we RETAINED much of our own powers granting no government authority over them. Within the US Constitution it is made clear that not only are the natural rights of the people PROTECTED FROM those that serve within our governments, but NOT all authority over things the people over themselves have was delegated, but instead was kept, retained, by the people for themselves to decide.

    George Washington, Farewell Address: “It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free Country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective Constitutional spheres; avoiding in the exercise of the Powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create whatever the form of government, a real despotism. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power; by dividing and distributing it into different depositories, and constituting each the Guardian of the Public Weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them.” (We have not done this, but we have the power and authority to do so retained to us.)

    The US Constitution requires an Oath from every single person – no matter the level of the position – that occupies a governmental position to support and defend that document above the orders of any superiors – if any, and before the duties of the position being occupied. This is required of EVERY person who serves within our government.

    These things were done because they knew that the people drawn to “power” over others would be pushing for the positions in government. So they put everything that those who would serve in government in writing in different documents – each state has one, and the general (federal) constitution that deals as a representative of the states in dealing with foreign affairs. So NO person was given power, but were only allowed to use the power of the branch or office in which they served for as long as they did the duties assigned to that position and took and kept the Oath.

    Alexander Hamilton: “Every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”

    The Oath, and loyalty/allegiance, is NOT to any person or governmental position, but to the US Constitution first and foremost, and then to our own state’s Constitution. That is the requirement of every person who serves within our government, and it matters not if they are elected, hired, contracted, etc; ALL are required to be Oath bound to that document and to put its safety and continuance first as IT is our country, our values, our life.

    J. Reuben Clark: “God provided that in this land of liberty, our political allegiance shall run NOT TO INDIVIDUALS, that is, to government officials, no matter how great or how small they may be. Under His plan OUR ALLEGIANCE and the only allegiance we owe as citizens or denizens of the United States, RUNS TO OUR INSPIRED CONSTITUTION which God himself set up. SO RUNS THE OATH OF OFFICE of those who participate in government. A certain loyalty we do owe to the office which a man holds, but even here we owe just by reason of our citizenship, no loyalty to the man himself. IN OTHER COUNTRIES IT IS TO THE INDIVIDUAL THAT ALLEGIANCE RUNS. THIS PRINCIPLE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE CONSTITUTION IS BASIC TO OUR FREEDOM. It is one of the great principles that distinguishes this “land of liberty” from other countries”. (caps mine)

    James Madison, Federalist 46: “The Federal and State Governments are in fact but different agents and trustees of the people, instituted with different powers, and designated for different purposes… They must be told that the ultimate authority, wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone; and that it will not depend merely on the comparative ambition or address of the different governments, whether either, or which of them, will be able to enlarge its sphere of jurisdiction at the expence of the other.”

    Whistle blowing is not a crime, but a requirement of the Oath to all who are required to take it. Just most people who serve within our governments in any capacity have little moral compass/backbone to do what is required of them. Think not? Look at what our “government” is today. If all or even part of those who took the Oath kept it, we would not be in this position. If they but read and understand the US Constitution to which they are bound, would we be here in this condition? I do not think so, because if they are brave enough to face down death for banks and corporations, then I must believe they would do the same for their own country.

    God Bless All, and Stay Safe!

    Cal

    If there were never intended to be action to defend the Constitution from those who are domestically attempting to destroy its power and authority, why would each Oath require it of those who take the Oaths?

    Chief Tecumseh: “When it comes your time to die, be not like those whose hearts are filled with the fear of death, so that when their time comes they weep and pray for a little more time to live their lives over again in a different way. Sing your death song and die like a hero going home.”

  2. In simple terms, one can look at the enormous volume of laws and regulations used in a corrupt effort to control absolutely everything imaginable. There are those of mind who intentionally create this environment of oppression. With that said, the citizen has became conditioned to get in step with all laws and regulations as being legitimate “because it’s the law.” So, moving to the information gathering of NSA operations, there are those who are firmly instep with “it is for our national security” thus it is okay. What Snowden basically did was reveal the personal level at which the lawless government gathers intelligence on everything and everyone. The goal of course is to control the humane domain through artificial intelligence and they count on the sheeple getting in line to comply while demonizing those of us who with a clear mind know it to be the ultimate demise of any sense of freedom. Conquer and divide the masses, just as we witness accelerating on a daily basis under the current regime. Imagine simply what turning off the internet to specific groups would do? We now know, in part from Snowden’s revelations, that the empire has the technology to “switch” you off in the digital world of everything you depend on digitally. Think about how enslaved most citizens have become.

    If I were Snowden, I’d stay put, pardon or no pardon. A pardon doesn’t end the evil that will pursue him or any of those that at any level come out exposing our governments criminality,

  3. Full Disclosure: I am a current intelligence Operations Specialist for the DoD, I work with a few oathkeepers but am undecided on whether Oathkeepers judgment can be trusted, but I think the Oathkeeper’s intentions seem to be good.

    With regard to Snowden, On the week of July 1st 2016 senior Russian security official Franz Klintsevich admitted in a German interview with BILD (a German media outlet) that Snowden was a recruited Russian spy. Furthermore, please feel free to FOIA the classified damage assessment of Snowden’s actions. Oathkeepers with a legitimate CI background with experience with Russia should be able to validate what I’m saying here. Even from a common sense perspective, Snowden running off to Russia because of U.S. civil liberty violations is on par with a person running off to Iran because they think there is better religions freedom over there. If the oathkeepers wants to more effectively recruit and broaden its appeal, the quality of analysis in what positions to take and why has to improve.

    With regard to the comments regarding what a whistleblower is / isn’t, a whistle blower doesn’t run off with classified documents to a hostile foreign power, they take only the documents relevant to what they’re blowing the whistle on and get an attorney. If they feel like they need to flee the country they go to some place like Iceland or Indonesia (no extradition treaty country), not Russia/China/Iran/Cuba/etc… (which by the way we do have extradition treaties with).

Comments are closed.