[mchusma]

I agree with everything but the concept that what he did "is without a doubt a crime." In fact, many people, including lawyers and constitutional scholars, have debate on the subject. The reasons they might not be a crime include: -Legal whistle blower protections -precedent of committing lesser crimes to prevent larger crimes -international case law around disobeying illegal orders -the application of reasonableness in the 4th amendment

Snowden is committing a crime no more than Daniel Ellsburg releasing the Pentagon Papers was a crime, and Mark Felt (Deep Throat) was a criminal for exposing FBI and presidential misconduct.

[nicholassmith]

Ooh, that's interesting thank you. My knowledge of constitutional application is Not Great, so it's interesting it'd fall within that. I think it's possibly still a crime but one with a certain level of legal affordability, but I'm sure much smarter people than me are working on that definition.

I'd have said the last one (FBI & President) wouldn't fall under treason exactly, as whilst they were whistleblower leakers they weren't of a certain level of international security relations.