"See, treason can only apply if Snowden's leaks are factually correct. So by claiming he's guilty of treason, people like Sen. Feinstein are actually admitting his leaked PRISM slides are, in fact, correct and true. That's why they're so angry about it..."

How can NSA whistleblower Snowden be guilty of treason if the NSA claims it isn't spying on you after all?

Mike Adams

All across the mainstream media, you're hearing Republicans and Democrats accuse Edward Snowden of "treason" for blowing the whistle on the NSA surveillance scandal. Feinstein, Boehner, Bolton and others are all joining in the chorus of the absurd by screaming about how Edward Snowden is a "traitor" to the United States because he betrayed the nation by disclosing highly sensitive secrets.

But at the same time, the NSA claims it isn't spying on you at all. National intelligence director James Clapper says, "The notion that we are trolling through everyone's emails, and voyeuristically reading them, or listening to everyone's phone calls, is on its face absurd. We couldn't do it even if we wanted to, and I assure you, we don't want to."

So then how is Edward Snowden guilty of treason if everything he leaked isn't true?

See, treason can only apply if Snowden's leaks are factually correct. So by claiming he's guilty of treason, people like Sen. Feinstein are actually admitting his leaked PRISM slides are, in fact, correct and true. That's why they're so angry about it...

Because someone can't be guilty of treason for making up their own fictional slides and handing them to the Guardian. That's not treason... that's just a prank. And according to the NSA, Snowden is engaged in nothing more than a giant prank. James Clapper and everyone else in the intelligence apparatus denies the government is spying on you at all. Therefore, Snowden can't be engaged in "treason" because the information he leaked isn't real.

In other words, the two statements that "Snowden is a traitor" and "the information he leaked isn't true" can't both be accurate.

Treason doesn't apply to Snowden even if the information is true

But there's more to this story: "Treason" doesn't apply to Snowden even if the information he leaked is true (which it is, by the way, and that explains why people like Feinstein are frothing at the mouth, freaking out over it).

As Evan Soltas correctly points out at Bloomberg.com, Snowden's leaking of documents:

...wasn't treason under U.S. law. Article III of the Constitution defines it narrowly: It "shall consist only in levying War against'' the U.S., "or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." Judges have read that to mean joining enemy military forces or giving them intelligence directly. Snowden did neither. He sent documents to two newspapers.

Even more abhorrently, Sen. Feinstein recently said Snowden was guilty of treason because he "violated his oath as a government employee to uphold the Constitution," reports Breitbart.com.

So wait... the Senator who is on the record as the most vicious aggressor against the Bill of Rights and the Second Amendment is now accusing Snowden of violating his oath to the government? Does Feinstein have no memory of her own oath to "protect and defend" the Constitution of the United States of America?

Sen. Feinstein calling Snowden a traitor is a lot like a child rapist calling a serial flasher a pervert.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/040743_NSA_whistleblower_Edward_Snowden_treason.html#ixzz2W1H6k4kj