Former CIA director and decorated war veteran David Petraeus was sentenced to only two years of probation for leaking classified documents, a far cry from the life imprisonment that exiled whistleblower and former NSA spy Edward Snowden fears he faces should he return to the U.S.
Now that it has been revealed that Petraeus won't serve a day in jail for his crimes, Snowden supporters are calling for similar leniency in his prosecution.
The difference between the two crimes? Petraeus gave eight books of classified documents to his mistress - documents which included, according to court papers, "classified information regarding the identities of covert officers, war strategy, intelligence capabilities and mechanisms, diplomatic discussions, quotes and deliberative discussions from high-level National Security Council meetings, and [Petraeus'] discussions with the President of the United States of America."
He then knowingly lied to the FBI about it. Snowden, on the other hand, publicly shared secrets to stop what he believed was unconstitutional mass surveillance.
Snowden's been living under asylum in Russia since the U.S. government cancelled his passport in 2013, but he's said that he would like to return to the U.S. if he could be assured he would get a fair trial.
"Snowden would be amenable to coming back to the United States for the kind of plea bargain that Gen. Petraeus received," Jesselyn Radack, an attorney for Snowden who works at the Government Accountability Project, told Politico Tuesday.
Another attorney working for Snowden, Ben Wizner, has been attempting to negotiate his return to the U.S., and believes the same generosity that Petraeus received should be given to Snowden.
"If Petraeus deserves exceptional treatment because of his service to the nation, then surely the same exception should be offered to Edward Snowden, whose actions have led to a historic global debate that will strengthen free societies," Wizner told U.S. News.
"The problem is that leniency is only extended to officials with friends in high places," he said.
In comparing Snowden and Petraeus' actions, Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., said, "Gen. Petraeus violated the law to impress a girlfriend," accing to U.S. News. "Edward Snowden released confidential information in order to bring attention to overwhelming and pervasive constitutional violations."
Snowden disclosed "the fact that the Fourth Amendment seems to be shredded, the fact that the constitutional requirements of probable cause and particularity have been thrown out the window - these are things we never would have known but for his actions," Grayson continued, U.S. News reported.
"Petraeus is part of the club and Edward Snowden is not," he says. "I don't expect the kind of leniency that was shown to someone who is an insider will also be conferred on someone who is an outsider, particularly when you view the administration's abysmal record regarding whistleblowers in general."
The first person ever charged under the Espionage Act, Daniel Ellsberg, told The Guardian he believes that the charges against Snowden are not any more serious than those brought against Petraeus, even more so when motives are considered.
"The factual charges against [Edward Snowden] are not more serious, as violations of the classification regulations and non-disclosure agreements, than those Petraeus has admitted to, which are actually quite spectacular," Ellsberg said.
"If disclosing the identities of covert agents to an unauthorized person and storing them in several unauthorized locations deserves a charge with a maximum sentence of one year," Ellsberg said, "then Edward Snowden should face not more than that same one count."
