@smsaideman That is your narrative. That doesn't change that 1) both leaked to public 2) both leaked info broadly considered important
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel
.
@emptywheel stretches the concept of leaker to be pretty meaningless. 2/22 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @smsaideman
@smsaideman Um. They leaked. If calling people who leaked leakers makes it meaningless English is meaningless. Action, action description.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel they did more than leak, they flooded. Big difference. Leaking suggests discretion, limitation, focus.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @smsaideman
@smsaideman No. Whistleblowing suggests discretion. Leaking is leaking.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel we are not going to converge anytime soon, and I am on a deadline. Gotta go. Enjoy your hopefully not rainy day (rain here)1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @smsaideman
@smsaideman No. But you've dodged underlying point nicely: so long as govt overcharges w/espionage, there'll be more leaking/fleeing.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
@emptywheel not sure about that assertion. and I am not sure espionage is overcharging--depends what Snowden gave to Chinese/Russians1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @smsaideman
@smsaideman Again, they charged him BEFORE Russia. THAT's why timeline matters.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
@smsaideman Thus far we have NO EVIDENCE he gave them anything privately, just the leaks on us hacking China. & that's not what was charged
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.