Donald Trump Thinks The Extradition Process Is Too Slow, Suggests Just Killing Edward Snowden

from the oh...-so-that-hairdo's-called-an-'asshat' dept

I’m not sure at which point Fox News’ “Fox & Friends” decided Donald Trump held a valid opinion on anything beyond bankruptcy proceedings and divorce settlements, but the hosts went ahead and let the man talk (about current affairs, no less).

Trump has no time in his busy life for due process or anything else we Americans take for granted in our justice system. There’s only one way to deal with a “spy” like Edward Snowden.

“You know, spies in the old days used to be executed,” Trump said. “This guy is becoming a hero in some circles. Now, I will say, with the passage of time, even people that were sort of liking him and were trying to go on his side are maybe dropping out… We have to get him back and we have to get him back fast. It could take months or it could take years, and that would be pathetic.”

At this point, we’re still dealing with the rhetorical. Trump thinks swift justice is the best justice and allowing Snowden to roam the earth somewhat freely is “pathetic.” The severely wounded pride of the Republic can’t bear the weight of another leak. Trump goes back against his first statement with his followup.

“This guy’s a bad guy and, you know, there’s still a thing called execution,” he went on. “You really have to take a strong… You have thousands of people with access to material like this. We’re not going to have a country any longer.”

It no longer sounds like Trump wants Snowden taken into custody. It sounds more like he’d prefer someone to put out a hit on him. Again, Trump’s concern for this glorious nation of ours drives his soulful plea to kill an American citizen who’s only been charged with embarrassing his betters espionage and “theft” of government property.

Of course, Trump doesn’t have the power to see this action carried out. But, then again, neither does the government. Snowden isn’t a “spy” and hasn’t been charged with treason, one of the few federal crimes that includes execution as a punishment option. So, this is just Trump fantasizing about putting Snowden down because he doesn’t like what he’s done.

As for “not having a country any longer,” does this mean Trump is happy with the status quo? The country we have currently is the country we want? Snowden’s leaks exposed the government for what it is: a complicit entity that carries water for security agencies and g-men. This is a country whose citizens’ rights are being sacrificed on the cross of safety. We hardly have a “country” as it is — at least not one that would be easily recognized by the founding fathers. And this is what would be saved by the death of Edward Snowden? This is what would be preserved by spilling blood in order to stem the flow previously suppressed information?

If so, who wants it? I know I don’t. But if Trump feels this sort of thing is necessary to “protect” the nation, then it’s certainly the country he deserves.

Filed Under: , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Donald Trump Thinks The Extradition Process Is Too Slow, Suggests Just Killing Edward Snowden”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
93 Comments
Chris-Mouse (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

>The Government may not be legally allowed to execute the guy

Um, yes, they are. It’s called targeted killing.

United States Bill of Rights, Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

The government cannot simply decide to kill someone without violating the constitution. Not that that seems to bother them very much these days.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

The US government seems to think that the Constitution and Bill of rights only apples to US citizens while they are on US soil. Any foreigners, and any US citizens in foreign countries are outside the protection of the these documents. This is one of the driving forces behind foreign opposition to the US, and a cause of terrorism against it, its sheer hypocrisy on human rights especially when ignoring them benefits US corporations.

Vincent Clement (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 Re:

“The US government seems to think that the Constitution and Bill of rights only apples to US citizens while they are on US soil.”

Actually, the US government doesn’t seem to care much about the Constitution. Period. If it did, you wouldn’t have CBP checkpoints 20 miles from the US-Mexico border and you wouldn’t have CBP officials inspecting vehicles and asking for documentation when leaving the US.

Neal says:

This shows that Trump doesn't think before he speaks

Trump hasn’t bothered to stop and think about all the business deals he’s been in on or the variety of people he’s been in on them with. Without a doubt there’s been both direct and indirect contact with people and organizations who have ties to terrorists. Without a doubt there’s been varying degrees of immorality and illegality involved in some of those deals and most definitely a lot more that skirts those lines.

Does Trump really want the government having all those records on hands so that, some day when someone in power takes aim at a new person or threat, it can follow a trail back to him and accuse him of supporting terrorists?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Breaking News

Donald Trump, just like any American has the right to free speech (at least technically anyway), he can say what he wants, as long as it is not slander. We also have the same right to call him out for making such a ridiculous suggestion.

Nonetheless, its been such a long time since the bill of rights (and its 1st amendment) actually meant something. There’s no point to having a constitution if nobody abides it, or even knows what it says… the days when people actually cared are becoming a distant memory.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Breaking News

Donald spouts off dangerous idiotic nonsense about summary executions – free speech.

People mock him relentlessly for it – also free speech.

I feel like your last line has to be a joke. It is right? I mean Donald is the one literally suggesting that we have guns so people like snowden should watch what they say so that has to be an intentionally humorous juxtaposition… right?

Anonymous Coward says:

Why is Trumpy there not being prosecuted for advocating violence, terrorism and other charges?

The guy is clearly saying he want to solve issues by force.

Maybe the people should put a hit of the fucker.

What would happen to anybody who tried to raise money to “kill Trump Kickstarter” or “Trumps must die” campaign?

If he was hit by and IED I wouldn’t care, you know there is always the IED option to deal with fuckers like that.

I fully expect my comment to raise concerns and if I ever get traced, I would be treated as a terrorist but D. fucker Trump apparently is above the law and can say that crap on live air with no consequences?

That shit ain’t right, it isn’t right at all.

Anonymous Coward says:

So, would Trump be fine with the same treatment for him?

So, would Trump be okay with the same treatment for him as a suspected criminal? If say people started to accuse him and his company of committing massive amounts of fraud that cost tax payers millions of dollars?

Sure we COULD try to get Trump arrested for alleged fraud, but Trump with all his millions could drag a trial out for years with all the lawyers he’d hire. It would be much easier and quicker to avenge the people he defrauded if we executed him with an armed drone, regardless of if he’s in America or some foreign country on a supposed ‘business’ trip.

I’m sure Trump would have no problem with that once so ever! After all, if due process isn’t for Snowden why should it be for anyone else?

mariush (profile) says:

It’s not the first time Trump called for some people to be killed.

In 1989 he financed a full page ad in a newspaper calling for death sentence for 5 kids who supposedly raped a woman in a park.
Turned out they were innocent…

Here’s an article about it:

http://www.nytimes.com/1989/05/01/nyregion/angered-by-attack-trump-urges-return-of-the-death-penalty.html

http://thegrio.com/2013/04/23/donald-trump-tweets-then-deletes-what-were-central-park-five-doing-in-the-park/

DannyB (profile) says:

It is sad for our country

It’s truly sad that the prior election didn’t give us a president with Trump’s decisive instant harsh, rash and irreversible knee jerk reactions.

It is a gift to instantly deduce or intuit all of the facts and to instantly know the answer to everything and to instantly act accordingly.

That is a man I would trust with a big red button. To facilitate access, they should get rid of that football, and launch protocols and just give Trump a remote he can carry in his pocket. (It would be important that the remote has a large “Trump” label on it.)

Anonymous Coward says:

As for “not having a country any longer,” does this mean Trump is happy with the status quo? The country we have currently is the country we want?

What kind of out of the blue assumption is that, do you feel because you do, that ALL AMERICANS ARE NOT HAPPY, or at least accepting of how your country is run ?

I doubt everyone is 100% happy all the time, and some are unhappy most of the time, but to make a claim that Trump is “happy with the status quo” or NOT happy with some particular things.. Is just stupid, overreaching tripe..

Just what we expect from Masnick and his ilk.

We hardly have a “country” as it is — at least not one that would be easily recognized by the founding fathers.

that’s your opinion Tim !!! it might be true it would not be easily recognized by the founding fathers, after all they lived at a different time than us, but even in their day there was spying, terrorists and knowing “things change” the founding fathers in their wisdom created the Supreme Court, to do that recognition for them.

So NSA as phone companies for your phone bill, and you feel that gives you cause to state We hardly have a “country” as it is

What a freaking joke..

But well done for keeping Snowman in the news and not his message, (whatever that was!!!)

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Allow me to remind you: The message is that the USA is doing a lot more than its citizens would like, in the name of national security, which is not what anyone asked for.

the government is making it about the messenger and not the message. and apparently, you are trying to do the same exact thing..

your colors keep showing, darryl.

John Fenderson (profile) says:

Re: Re:

What kind of out of the blue assumption is that, do you feel because you do, that ALL AMERICANS ARE NOT HAPPY, or at least accepting of how your country is run ?

Every poll is showing that most Americans are not happy with the direction the country is taking, so Tim is on solid ground here.

knowing “things change” the founding fathers in their wisdom created the Supreme Court, to do that recognition for them.

That’s not the role of the Supreme Court at all. The issue of changing circumstances is addressed with the process to amend the Constitution.

MondoGordo (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: just to play devils advocate ...

No … I don’t. The very suggestion that he would face trial at all for performing a public service is ludicrous; the fact that he would most definitely be prosecuted is a travesty.

What I am saying is that he falls short of hero.
A hero stands, he does not run.

And if the hero falls to tyranny it’s our responsibility to ensure that the tree of liberty does not wither ….

wthoutadbt (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 just to play devils advocate ...

Actually I think it’s the other way around, the tyrants are firmly entrenched in Washington, D.C.

Up until someone can convince me, show me without a shadow of a doubt, that Snowden committed an unpardonable and heinous act, what he has just uncovered) in my book, is an act of patriotism and heroism and it took a hell of a lot of courage to do it.

I refer you to: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-23/u-s-surveillance-is-not-aimed-at-terrorists.html

John Fenderson (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 just to play devils advocate ...

A hero stands, he does not run.

A hero runs when running is the best way to further his goals. I don’t know if this was Snowden’s calculus or not, but as soon as he’s in the hands of the US authorities, then all of the attention will be focused on him, the messenger, and away from the real problems that he revealed.

It would accomplish the exact opposite of what he said he wants to accomplish. Therefore running is the right thing to do.

Anonymous Coward says:

like all those with power and wealth, he just gets gob in motion before brain is engaged! he didn’t like when the Scots blew him out from building his golf course and thinks that only the highest thought of people should give opinions. maybe if he was on the receiving end of similar ridiculous statements he would feel a bit different!

wthoutadbt (profile) says:

I Used to Like Donald Trump

Thanks for your website and a well-written article. During the Cold War and before, no one questioned their government, government could do no wrong, wave the flag, don’t question, just accept what they tell you, etc. But today, something has changed. We have people who are siding with Snowden (as opposed to the government) and concluding that what he did was right. Why would this be so? I can’t put my finger on it but I believe a new awareness, an awakening is taking place. The shackles and blinders are falling of. The putrid, stinking slime that are government deception and lies that have been ongoing for years are finally being exposed. People are taking sides and the numbers are frightening especially when they conflict with the lame excuses coming from the government regarding why this massive spy program PRISM was created in the first place. I used to like Donald Trump and respected him. But after the remarks he made regarding Snowden, no more. What drove Snowden to release this information in the first place? How was he able to access it? Did he have any idea how much peril he would be putting himself in? And what other data does he still have that has not been made public? These are still questions that beg answers but at the present time, I believe Snowden is someone to be heralded as coming forward, exposing the most massive spying operation on the American people ever. Then they say that it is all for our benefit as it was put into place, after 9-11, to catch terrorists. Okay, then, answer this question…How is it that we will not secure and protect our southern border? The Constitution mandates that our borders be secured by our military, in order to protect the American people. We have Mexican drug cartels in bed with Hezbollah who are freely traveling back and forth. And the government continues to look the other way. Instead, they paint the ones raising the alarm as the bad guy and ignore the real enemy right in our own backyard. And how can we call ourselves free men and women when we learn about what’s been going on behind our backs, by our own government? Time to take the country back.

wthoutadbt (profile) says:

Yes. Benjamin Franklin was the only one to sign all four documents that created our Republic: The Declaration of Independence (1776); The Treaty of Alliance, Amity and Commerce with France (1778); The Treaty of Peace between England, France and the United States (1782); and the Constitution (1787); he also wrote parts of the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution.

wthoutadbt (profile) says:

Trumped Up

Has anyone even figured out what to charge Snowden with?
How can you charge someone with a crime when we don’t even know what crime he committed other than to let us all in on a massive government spying program that they’ve kept under the radar for years?
Have you heard anyone in the media speak out, on behalf of the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, that the NSA trampled all over?
We’re all focusing on Snowden and forgetting the government just overstepped its bounds, on a massive scale.
This should be the real story.
——————————-
The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. It was adopted as a response to the abuse of the writ of assistance, which is a type of general search warrant, in the American Revolution. Search and seizure (including arrest) should be limited in scope according to specific information supplied to the issuing court, usually by a law enforcement officer, who has sworn by it. The Fourth Amendment applies to the states by way of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Contents

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...