John Kiriakou was the CIA fellow who told the rest of us, for the first time, apparently, about some of the CIA waterboarding, which at least some persons consider torture and a potential crime . . .

Apparently revealing the criminal conduct of the US gov is a crime under the Espionage act?

by the way, I don't suppose it is possible to ask what US attorney was responsible for prosecuting him, so that I and other can pray that God show this US attorney the right way, by name?

I get to pray for this fellow, that God show him the right way, who used the Espionage Act to go after a fellow who revealed waterboarding, but only anonymously?

Yet thanks to the recent release of her brother David Greenglass's grand jury testimony in that case, considerable doubt has now been cast upon both the strength and the veracity of the government's case against Mrs. Rosenberg, raising the likelihood that the United States both knowingly convicted her on the basis of clearly perjured testimony, and then proceeded to execute a likely innocent woman.

In sharp contrast to his grand jury testimony, a significant portion of David Greenglass's trial testimony -- specifically that which implicated his own sister Ethel in David's and Julius Rosenberg's scheme to pass atomic secrets to the Soviet Union -- appears to have been little more than outright fabrication, a duplicitous effort to save his own hide as well as that of his wife, Ruth.

Further, given that these major discrepancies in both Greenglass's grand jury and his trial testimony appears to have not caused federal prosecutors much if any concern, the authorities obviously had little or no problem condemning a likely innocent woman to share her husband's fate in the electric chair. More chillingly, did they knowingly suborn Greenglass's perjury about his sister in an effort to get Julius to talk -- by threatening his wife?

Rather have those prosecutors face the shame of subsequent exposure during their own lifetimes, presiding Federal Judge Irving Kaufman ordered the grand jury testimony of the Rosenberg case sealed. And the truly sad part about this is that on the occasion of Judge Alvin Hellerstein's reversal of Kaufman's original order two weeks ago, only a few media outlets such as The Guardian, USA Today and US News & World Report saw fit to cover this important story.

I am fairly certain that history will eventually vindicate Edward Snowden for his actions. But I'm also resigned to the fact that it will probably be quite a while before that finally happens, and likely not in our own lifetimes. Further, that occasion, if and when it finally comes, may well be met with a yawning indifference by our own progeny, not unlike how the new revelations in U.S. v. Rosenberg are being greeted today.

Pardon him?  There's no way this administration is going to do that.  In fact, I'd say they've probably committed to doubling down on bringing the full force and effect of the government down on him.

Of all the things that have come out of the Obama administration, this particular aspect, the effort to shut down dissent in a most undemocratic and fully authoritarian way, the zeal to punish people of conscience, doesn't get a lot of attention.  It goes to the back burner while people praise and marvel at progressive accomplishments.  It's not that those accomplishments aren't real or aren't valuable - they are - but I can't reconcile them with this authoritarian, boot-to-the-neck attitude and policy.  

Only, reiterated the charges and the call to come home and face the music--complete with all the sour notes of that relic, the Espionage Act of 1917, whose applicability to whistleblowers rather than World War I subversives and spies was not iterated or reiterated.

"Mr. Snowden's decision to steal and disclose classified information had severe consequences for the security of our country...."  It is questionable if Whistleblowers "steal" information, or "reveal" information about government  excesses, abuses or illegalities. .  But, it is unquestionable that Edward Snowden did not disclose information.  Snowden provided it to news organizations for them to cull and disclose: Guardian, WaPO, NyT and the Intercept disclosed the information.  

And, as if to a class of schoolchildren, Ms. Monaco lectures that "we live in a dangerous world."  Well, that is surely a persuasive argument.  Almost as much so, as "..our intelligence community must have all the lawful tools it needs.."   Yes, that is the point--the lawful tools. We need look no farther than James Clapper to find an official who lied and oversaw illegalities.   And, affirmed by federal judges.

Edward Snowden was an agent of change.  Changes implemented subsequently, by the president and congress.  It is not surprising that President Obama did not pardon Snowden, the "severe consequences" of his actions have been demonstrated to be, essentially,  those of embarrassment.

No, pardon was always out of the question,  After all, not even an apology was given to Evo Morales, President of Bolivia who was on official business, for the grounding and routing of his plane to Vienna on the rumor that Snowden was a stowaway.   Perhaps, Ms. Monaco could come up with a simple regret for Morales.  After all he is not covered by the Espionage Act.

Does anyone wish to help make the world a slightly better place?

And, if you do pray . . . and if you think praying is a nice thought or that God might even conceivably show up somehow . . . and if you regard the prosecution of Kiriakou as wrong as I do . . . then, consider praying that God show Iris Lan, Mark Schneider and Ryan Fayhee the right way!