Comment: >

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: < (see in situ)

>

1) "I would think of innocent as undistilled.. pure"

Distilled, meaning having encompassed pollution and subsequently purified

2) "Most people who did not agree with their employer would quit, not steal property and then run"

Incorrect: your premise substitutes a professional company for the government's documented violation of individual privacy. Secondly I will concede that ES's leak was not administratively approved, while informed civil disobedience IMO has a just place in a free society. Thirdly regarding 'running', I believe that the distrust of federal jurisdiction (ie. Patriot Act, NDAA) and avoidance of its potentially violent clandestine retribution (possibly including Michael Hastings, Barry Jennings, etc) is warranted. Having the Attorney General likewise say that ES would not receive the death penalty when no individual's agency has been personally harmed IMO is hardly encouraging

3) "ES has admitted and GG has admitted he received the stolen property from GG"

Incorrect: neither ES or GG have defined the publication of civil documents as 'theft'; I subsequently agree that the public has every right to be informed of what is done in their name