While I agree with the overall sentiment of this editorial, I think one thing is very wonky. It says that Snowden provided "enormous value" and "has done his co

While I agree with the overall sentiment of this editorial, I think one thing is very wonky. It says that Snowden provided "enormous value" and "has done his country a great service." But if you agree with these statements then how could a successful resolution include a "please bargain" and punishment, even if it is "substantially reduced"? The whole idea of being a whistleblower is that you get immunity. If you agree that Snowden is a de facto whistleblower then punishment and prison time shouldn't even be on the table.