Exec order, donate to Snowden defense, have your property confiscated

There are not many agencies carrying this story right now....they're probably gun shy considering the risks of upsetting our "leader". You can find the story in a few places but here is the executive order from the White House's website. They didn't like the money that was rolling in to defend Edward Snowden...so they made it illegal.

www.whitehouse.gov...

Wow...

I guess don't donate TO him? Maybe to a lawyer, or something?

The legalese dissuades me from reading whole exec order... We need to Barney-Stylize laws so the average American can understand them...

a reply to: Hr2burn

or for the benefit of any person whose property and interests in property are blocked pursuant to section 1 of this order would seriously impair my ability to deal with the national emergency declared in this order, and I hereby prohibit such donations as provided by section 1 of this order.

Obama better sanction himself LOL. That gold schedule seriously impairs his ability to do anything, let alone deal with a national emergency.

On the face of it, governments make all kinds of alleged laws to enrich themselves or benefit their handlers agendas. Just look at the IRS and the FED, or the FDA, or the EPA, all of them are in conflicts of interests.

Cheers - Dave

originally posted by: Hr2burn
There are not many agencies carrying this story right now....they're probably gun shy considering the risks of upsetting our "leader". You can find the story in a few places but here is the executive order from the White House's website. They didn't like the money that was rolling in to defend Edward Snowden...so they made it illegal.

www.whitehouse.gov...

Good. He is a treasonous criminal and shouldn't be allowed to hoard money from his fan club to pay for some high-priced celebrity lawyer.

originally posted by: Hr2burn
There are not many agencies carrying this story right now....they're probably gun shy considering the risks of upsetting our "leader". You can find the story in a few places but here is the executive order from the White House's website. They didn't like the money that was rolling in to defend Edward Snowden...so they made it illegal.

www.whitehouse.gov...

Wtf?

Seriously?

The pieceoftrash I mean POTUS, can kiss my back side.

If they weren't breaking the law with the stupid NSA crap then snowden wouldn't have done what he did.

Wtf is going on in this country?

When the government fears its' people, it's democracy.
When the people fear their government, it's tyranny.

This is tyranny.

a reply to: Hr2burn



It is a bit of a read, but I think it is saying if you send money to him it would be confiscated.


The fact that he signed it on April 1st is kind of twisted.

a reply to: Hr2burn

Well yeah... by our laws (cough) Snowden has committed crimes, though I consider it whistle blowing. If you give money to a criminal (Snowden doesn't deny what he did) then you are aiding and abetting a criminal which is also a crime.

I can see one day in US there will be a court case constitution versus executive order, now that will be an entertaining one to watch through the courts as constitution makes no mention of executive orders.

originally posted by: lambs to lions

originally posted by: Hr2burn
There are not many agencies carrying this story right now....they're probably gun shy considering the risks of upsetting our "leader". You can find the story in a few places but here is the executive order from the White House's website. They didn't like the money that was rolling in to defend Edward Snowden...so they made it illegal.

www.whitehouse.gov...

Good. He is a treasonous criminal and shouldn't be allowed to hoard money from his fan club to pay for some high-priced celebrity lawyer.

Why not?

Since when does the president, sorry meant caesar have the authority to make binding law concerning my money, or who I choose to help defend?

Not to mention, people help pay to defend others all the time, and have for all of this countries history.

Not of course mentioning the fact that all he did was expose the fact the gov is breaking the law by doing what they are doing.

In your opinion it is OK for the gov to break the law, but treasonous to expose it?

originally posted by: AthlonSavage
I can see one day in US there will be a court case constitution versus executive order, now that will be an entertaining one to watch through the courts as constitution makes no mention of executive orders.

Exactly!!!

The POTUS does not have the power to rule by fiat.

I am tempted to send snowden money just to take this before the supremes.

This is obvious bs.

Here's a page I found about it. If pointing out things our government is doing to us that we do like agree to makes Snowden treasonous, then I guess he is treasonous...I'm ok with that. Many see him as a real american hero.

freespeechtwentyfirstcentury.com...

Executive orders are more like executive suggestions.. with that said.. this is still a big deal because the suggestion is likely to be backed up..

I never touched the Snowden situation because of that ... I keep my commebts on it limited .. which is scary when you think about it ... Why should we as free Americans have to? ... that in and of itself is a HUGE problem... this would never stand in mass... it would stand in individual private cases I suspect...

a reply to: Hr2burn

He should write a book and sell it. OR be poor.

Lord knows he will never be hired for a normal job ever again in his life.

Oh, the irony.

originally posted by: lambs to lions

originally posted by: Hr2burn
There are not many agencies carrying this story right now....they're probably gun shy considering the risks of upsetting our "leader". You can find the story in a few places but here is the executive order from the White House's website. They didn't like the money that was rolling in to defend Edward Snowden...so they made it illegal.

www.whitehouse.gov...

Good. He is a treasonous criminal and shouldn't be allowed to hoard money from his fan club to pay for some high-priced celebrity lawyer.

Exactly.
He is also under the control of Russia. Probably was long before we knew who he was.

originally posted by: miniatus
Executive orders are more like executive suggestions.. with that said.. this is still a big deal because the suggestion is likely to be backed up..

I never touched the Snowden situation because of that ... I keep my commebts on it limited .. which is scary when you think about it ... Why should we as free Americans have to? ... that in and of itself is a HUGE problem... this would never stand in mass... it would stand in individual private cases I suspect...

Aiding and abetting along with conspiracy charges could come to his supporters some day after he is found guilty of treason.

a reply to: Kali74

Has he been convicted already for it ?

If not, he`s only just a suspect now.

Innocent until proven guilty?

originally posted by: xuenchen
Innocent until proven guilty?

Exactly!!!

Of course with the defense statistics for public defenders being basically 0 successful defenses.

No wonder obama wants snowden to have to use one.

originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
a reply to: Kali74

Has he been convicted already for it ?

If not, he`s only just a suspect now.

Maybe in Russia, but in america at present if Caesar I mean Obama points at you then you are guilty without due process.