So I read (on wikipedia so not the best source) the key tenants of the espionage act which he was found guilty under. I find it to be written generally enough t

So I read (on wikipedia so not the best source) the key tenants of the espionage act which he was found guilty under. I find it to be written generally enough to be ambiguous in a similar vein to recent laws such as the NDAA not really defining hostilites and enemies. I wonder what are the limitations on it? Was the constitutional definition of treason not enough. Again I feel like overly broad language in a law used to convict people that politicians deem need to be convicted. edit: I think this further proves my point/adds to its ambiguousness http://rt.com/usa/court-ruling-whistleblowers-prosecution-768/ http://rt.com/usa/court-ruling-whistleblowers-prosecution-76...