> In free countries there are court cases about such things. Not in less free countries.

Russia literally had court proceedings about Telegram, which this post is about. Is Russia not a "less free country"? Or are those not "real court cases" while "ours" are totally real (but you can't talk about them and must play charades, and the opposing side has super powers written into the law)? If you need help carrying those goal posts, let me know.

> The Snowden of China doesn't get his day in court, maybe never talked if his family back home was at risk.

Neither does the Snowden of the US of A, you know, that one guy... right, Snowden, who has to hide in Russia of all places to not get shipped off to Gitmo. And even if he took that route, I'm sure the apologists would say "well, this is one of those small imperfections but he's fortunate that he's not in Russia".

Snowden can in fact get his day in court.

His choice to not do so is understandable, but it's an option.

I'm a little lost on what you're saying at this point. I can't imagine you or I want to get into the judicial differences between the US and Russia.

Snowden has the choice of a court where he will not be able to defend himself. This is exactly how it works in China, Russia, or the former USSR.

As I understand it, Snowden is perfectly willing to go on trial in the US, as long as said trial is conducted in public.