Yes, I am pretty sure he wasn't a patriot. You could say nothing is to be trusted, in which case notning means anything. So, there's no point in even thinking

Yes, I am pretty sure he wasn't a patriot. You could say nothing is to be trusted, in which case notning means anything. So, there's no point in even thinking about it. Or, you can apply logic and decide what makes the most sense and, thus, whose story is most trustworthy. At the end of the day he stole documents and passed them to what is very reasonably claimed to be a cutout for Russian intelligence (logic would agree). You can look at the effect it had on the U.S. and who that advantaged. The claimed purpose was to blow the whistle on domestic spying (the presumed patriotism), however, the documents also contained information that damaged relations between the U.S. and one of its most important European and NATO allies (among other things). Again, who was keenly interested in embarrasing the U.S. and damaging such alliances? To top it off, he gains asylum in Russia? It's all just a bit too convenient. At the end of the day, you can appreciate what he did on the domestic spying front, but that doesn't absolve him. He provided aid and comfort to an adversary in ways that undermined his country. There's another word for that and it's the opposite of patriotism.