Kind of melodramatic, I think.
He complains about Obama violating his basic human right to seek asylum; someone should introduce him to the basic legal concept of extradition. What’s happening to him isn’t some crazy break with the law, nor is it an old tool of “political aggression”.
Of course, in addition to depriving him of his right to asylum, he also thinks they’re imposing on him “the extralegal penalty of exile”. And - well, does the contradiction have to be pointed out?
I was a cryptanalyst and linguist while in the Navy (1980 - 1986), and was assigned to programs for NSA. Part of our training emphasized that we were not to copy or listen to the conversations of U.S. citizens. To do so required a warrant, and we were just searching bandwidths looking for foreign comms.
Our training emphasized that we took an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution, including the rights of its citizens. Any illegal orders were to be reported.
My education included the history of WWII during the 1960s. The Nuremburg trials weren’t so far in the past, the late 1940s. Because of those trials, people were hanged for “following orders” that resulted in war crimes.
Go to Nachumlist.com, and see the dead associated with BHO2. Breitbart wasn’t the first, and Hastings will not be the last.
Melodramatic? I think not. Snowden has no doubt read history, and is familiar with the U.S.Constitution.
.
.
INCONVENIENT FACT FOR BARRY II:
- Russia has no extradiction treaty with the USA
.
.