“‘Is Edward Snowden a traitor?’: Senators repeatedly ask Gabbard for an answer,” read a recent CNN headline.
This was a hot topic for the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Members were questioning cabinet nominee Tulsi Gabbard. She is Trump’s choice for director of national intelligence.
CBS News added that “Numerous senators — both Republicans and Democrats — have questioned Gabbard on Snowden.”
How did Gabbard flub in her response? She ducked answering the question. Instead she responded with answers to questions that were never asked.
That didn’t go over well. A Time magazine article reported, “Gabbard’s Refusal to Call Snowden a Traitor Draws Pushback at Hearing to be Intel Chief.” The Wall Street Journal claimed, “Tulsi Gabbard’s Refusal to Call Snowden a Traitor Threatens to Sink Nomination.”
Sink her nomination? Over a stale issue from more than 10 years ago? It seems like the act of calling Snowden a traitor is now a litmus test of one’s qualifications for the national security post.
But what does it mean to be a traitor? Is it a crime to be one? Or are the senators just using the word as a pejorative?
Being a traitor sounds tantamount to committing treason. That certainly would be a crime. But Snowden appears not to have been convicted of even a single crime. Crimes have been alleged, but there have been no convictions. Under our system of justice this means he is entitled to a presumption of innocence.
However, in 2019 the United States did file a civil lawsuit against Snowden. It alleged that he published a book entitled Permanent Record. In doing so, the U.S. asserted that he violated non-disclosure agreements that he signed with the CIA and NSA. The U.S. won its case.
If you consider a person losing a civil lawsuit to be a traitor, then it would appear that he is a traitor. But you might also ask how many such traitors walk freely among us right now, free of scorn.
Even back in the day, around 2013 when Snowden was a hot topic, most Americans saw him in a positive light. According to a 2013 Quinnipiac poll “American voters say 55 – 34 percent that former National Security Agency consultant Edward Snowden is a whistleblower rather than a traitor.”
A June 2013 New Yorker story explains “Why Edward Snowden is a Hero.” Later, in 2016, Amnesty International reported, “Edward Snowden: A Hero, Not a Traitor.”
Gabbard may have flubbed when responding to the “traitor” question. She could have set the miscreant senators straight on who Snowden is and isn’t.
But if people start questioning why her answer to this should constitute a “litmus test,” perhaps her “flub” will turn out to have done the American public a great favor.
She will have exposed these Republican and Democratic senators to be phonies, advancing a false narrative apparently aimed at deceiving the public. Perhaps it is they who are the traitors. They are not being true to their responsibility to provide honest “advice and consent” on the nomination of Gabbard for director of national intelligence.
The real question here is why are so many senators asking the same question about Snowden? Who told them to ask it? Who is coordinating this assault on Gabbard’s pending nomination?
Why have Democrats and Republicans united against Gabbard to vilify her on the Snowden nonissue? How do they both benefit from that?
I’ll tell you what I suspect. It’s no secret that many politicians benefit in some way by protecting our defense industry and nurturing its growth by supporting a state of perpetual war.
Perhaps the benefit for senators comes in the form of defense contractor campaign contributions or travel opportunities. Or is a senator’s state’s economy bolstered by the presence military installations and defense industry factories? Do constituents credit their senators for bringing the related jobs and spending to their states? It’s hard to deny that possibility.
The foregoing intersects with Gabbard’s nomination in one simple way. She is opposed to the proliferation of kinetic wars that are in some way pursued by the United States.
Gabbard, a military officer herself, does not shy from maintaining a strong military defense capability. But involving ourselves in wars not directly connected to our own national interests is a different story and one she has spoken out strongly against.
It seems to me it’s high time to scrutinize the Republican and Democratic senators who are asking the Snowden question.
They appear to be trying to pull the wool over the public’s eyes to benefit themselves, not the country.
They would seem to be the real traitors here.
