What you don't like is the law... Fine, just don't keep saying he won't get a fair trial because according to the LAW he will. Saying he won't get a fair trial is wrong. The courts are there to fairly apply the law and for the most part, that's what they do.

Although it seems obvious to me that the laws on treason are fairly clear and even handed, and Snowden KNEW what the law said because he signed a confidentially agreement that told him what it was... I'm not sure how you think the law can be changed so Snowden get's what you think is a fair result, without letting other folks off who really *should* be convicted. But that's another discussion from this fair trial canard...

You act like this is some conspiracy or something...

Look, if they didn't want the trial, that's EASY, especially in Russia... Just kill him where he is, problem solved, no trial, no mess and none of the risk. Problem for your theory is that he's alive and kicking still and not "accidentally" dead...

Personally, I don't think they care one way or the other. Stay in Russia or stand trial, either way.. Politically it is pointless to push this on any front, especially while he's in Russia and not on TV. The strong defense folks on the right want him on trial for treason, the folks on the left want the administration on trial in the court of public opinion and THEY want the power that the information from the spying program gives them.

The best solution politically is to let him languish in Russia... And that's what I expect they will do.

Not with that amount of cash you can't..

Oh yes there would be a very public trial. Why do you need a closed trial when all the classified evidence has already been published by the accused and is in public domain? Just whip out the contract he signed when he was indoctrinated with his clearance and dig out the public records of the documents he claims to have released to the press. All you have to prove is HE released the classified information...

Why do people think he's not going to get an open trial? OR a fair one? The outcome may be obvious, but that doesn't make the trial unfair....

Exactly this..

Snowden was about advancing HIS image and person and not so much about exposing something that was wrong. Where I believe he thought he had legal grounds, he was self deluded and stupid.

Now he's just a pawn being used to poke the eye of the country he says he loved by a two bit despot.... Way to go dude, you sure messed that one up.

There goes my karma....

Secret doesn't imply a kangaroo court... However, I don't think he'd get a secret trial.

There is no reason for a secret trial. All the "secret" evidence is already in the public domain. Why go to all the trouble of setting up a closed trial now? Just try him on what is already public.

Your choice, but I suggest you pay attention to the primaries at least and go out of your way to vote in them. The main problem for both parties is the lack of interest in selecting the proper candidates, and the tendency to elect the "best looking" and best funded over the best candidate.

After that, may I suggest you pay attention to the principles behind the positions of each of the candidates and pick the one that most matches what you actually agree with. Not the sound bites on TV, their actual positions and records...

Of course this may take too much effort, in which case, just forget the whole thing and stop complaining about those who are elected in races you didn't vote in.

Unless Snowden was IN the military or in military custody outside the USA, he does not face a military trial. Once his feet hit US soil, he will have a criminal trial just like anybody else.

The Trial may closed for national security reasons, but until a judge says that's what will happen nobody knows if the trial would be public or not. However, I don't think the government would care either way. They might want to keep some of the evidence out of the public domain, but what point is there to trying to force a secret trial now? They have him dead to rights in the public domain on this already..

If the crime fits....

I have a feeling that he could plea bargain a deal that returned him to the states and preserved his life if for nothing else but to avoid the public trial.

Of course, being banished to Russia, is fine too.. I don't think this administration cares one way or the other.

John who?

Oh him... What would you charge him with? Loosing money or not wearing his seat belt?

These days if you tried that they'd be hauling your butt off to jail. This HIPPA thing make this a serious liability and hospitals and doctors have got nuts about it, so much that I cannot even make a doctor's appointment for my wife anymore, unless she's signed their form that says I can....

Malware is ALWAYS detectable... It may take awhile to scan, but if you really want to be 100% sure something is clean, there are ways.

I'd be pretty surprised if there are not processes and procedures in place to catch such things as they happen.....

You don't seriously think that they haven't thought about protecting their network connections outside of that super secure room do you?

Last time I checked, anything that carried data between these super secure locations was required to be encrypted by approved encryption devices using randomly assigned keys which changed frequently... Plus the infrastructure that carried the wiring had to be secured from tampering and frequently inspected... These networks don't "leak" as you might expect, but are well isolated both by encrypting data and electromagnetic shielding.

It's just as ridiculous to claim that a study on chickens means the same thing happens in humans....

Does it mean it's worth looking into in primates? Sure... But it's not time to break out in unified song that such stuff happens in humans and all this vaccination stuff is BAD BAD BAD...

By the Way "Chicken Pox" is in no way related to chickens... Nobody really knows why the word "chicken" is in the name to start with. It didn't come from chickens nor does it infect chickens.... Some theories say it's named after "chickpeas" or perhaps is some mixture of old English words that got morphed into "chicken", but there is no connection to the barnyard animal.

The availability of solar and say a coal fired plant are totally different numbers. Coal fired plants have reliability numbers for available output which is darned near one hundred percent of scheduled. Yes, there are failures from time to time, but the availability of a coal plant is really good and when they are making power, chances are it's going to be 100% of scheduled.

Photovoltaic solar, on the other hand, has variability approaching 50% of scheduled capacity ALL THE TIME. Lets say you have a forecasted 100MW solar capacity on line, you can only count on a fraction of that to be available and you need to have reserves to cover the variable fraction, even if you get what you forecasted. Wind is similar only it's worse, usually having about 35% (65% variable) capacity. It's hard to know where the sun will shine and how fast the wind will blow over the next 10 min, and you simply must as a grid operator KNOW how much power you are generating and how much you are using and they must balance or really bad things happen to the grid (think blackouts and equipment damage..)

So this reserve capacity needs to be up and spinning, ready for energy production when you put photovoltaic solar and wind into the mix. More reserve capacity than you would need w/o the renewables and their unreliable energy sources....