Washington, DC – July 30, 2013 – The Government Accountability Project (GAP) has been closely following the court martial of Army Private First Class Bradley Manning, including today’s ruling. This verdict holds vast implications for whistleblowers as a whole, including the fate of whistleblower Edward Snowden. GAP takes the following positions on today’s events:
I. The court’s ruling on the issue of aiding the enemy is a significant victory for whistleblowers and for the First Amendment.
The determination that Manning is not guilty of aiding the enemy is a significant victory for whistleblowers and for free speech. In terms of this one ruling, this marks a just outcome to an unprecedented case of judicial overreach. Even the potential of a ruling in favor of aiding the enemy arguably has a chilling effect on journalists and free speech. In essence, it would have put any author of materials found in the hands of a designated enemy of the United States at risk of being found guilty of aiding the enemy. This is an impossible standard and antithetical in a country that guarantees free speech to all its citizens.
II. The Manning verdict reinforces how difficult a fair trial would be for Snowden.
Though Manning was acquitted of aiding the enemy, he was still convicted on multiple other counts. This serves as a reminder that the prospect of a fair trial for Edward Snowden has always been tenuous, at best. Three days after the US Justice Department filed charges under seal against him, Snowden made this precise observation in an online chat on June 17, 2013: “The US Government, just as they did with other whistleblowers, immediately and predictably destroyed any possibility of a fair trial at home, openly declaring me guilty of treason and that the disclosure of secret, criminal, and even unconstitutional acts is an unforgivable crime.”
By the time Snowden wrote this, Senator Ben Nelson (D-FL), former Vice President Cheney, and Speaker of the House John Boehner had already openly branded him a “traitor.”
The whistleblowers Snowden referenced undoubtedly include Bradley Manning and former NSA Senior Executive Thomas Drake, a whistleblower who exposed misconduct at the agency in 2002 and was charged with felonies under the Espionage Act. Manning, tried in a court martial has fared badly, as we just learned, and Drake endured four years of investigation and indictment before the his prosecution imploded on the eve of trial in 2011.
The three whistleblowers — Manning, Snowden and Drake — have all suffered variously incarceration, professional and financial ruin, and exile. This is precedent and, unfortunately, what Americans can now expect from their country when they expose unconstitutional and repressive actions approved secretly by all three branches of government.
III. There is no greater validation of Snowden’s action than the endorsement of 3 senior-level ex-NSA whistleblowers.
Speaking at the National Press Club on Thursday, July 25,, 2013, former NSA Senior Executive Thomas Drake stated: “Manning, Snowden—I stand with them without equivocation. Without condition.”
Accompanied by ex-NSA senior-level whistleblowers William Binney and J. Kirk Wiebe, Drake denounced the Justice Department’s indictment of Snowden as retaliatory – an act of reprisal designed to intimidate anyone else at the NSA who might dare to tell the truth about the agency’s unconstitutional dragnet domestic spying.
As senior officials who left the NSA after denouncing its gross waste, abuse of authority and Constitutional violations, Drake, Wiebe and Binney are the only people capable of fairly judging the institutional misconduct Snowden revealed.
Drake, Wiebe and Binney understand the workings of the super-secret National Security Agency (a.k.a. ‘No Such Agency’) because they were there. Nonetheless, there is no shortage of opinions on the Snowden issue, but these opinions fall into two suspect categories: it is either associated with the perpetrators or based purely on speculation.
In the complicit category falls DNI James Clapper who is on the record as lying to Congress. General Michael Hayden also has a long record of deception and has stated that his primary professional goal is increasing the budget of the NSA. General Keith Alexander’s objectivity is similarly compromised.
Speculation runs rampant, but it must be said that any insights from individuals unassociated with the NSA, FBI or the CIA are based on the prevailing punditry or the plot lines of Hollywood thrillers. This is among the privileged information in the world, so intelligence gleaned from watching “The Bourne Identity” is simply not acceptable.
The accusers cannot have it both ways. They cannot accuse an individual of revealing vital secrets while professing assumed insights into this same secretive organization.
The Government Accountability Project (GAP) champions government and corporate accountability and transparency by advancing occupational free speech, defending whistleblowers, and empowering citizen activists. Since its founding in 1977, GAP has fought to make large bureaucratic institutions accountable through the effective exercise of conscience.
Contact:
Douglas Kim
External Relations Officer
Government Accountability Project
1612 K Street, NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20006
Mobile: (917) 907-4394
###