A strong implicit presumption behind Snowden's motives, right or wrong, is that the justice system is sufficiently rigged by the state that he would not receive

A strong implicit presumption behind Snowden's motives, right or wrong, is that the justice system is sufficiently rigged by the state that he would not receive a fair hearing here. It's also very reasonable to suppose, as he did, that going about things in the manner that he did was the only way to achieve his stated mission, since, by definition, what he wanted to publicise was highly classified. The downsides for himself, and to whatever extent for diplomacy and national security, were worth it in his eyes. Thus, the idea that he should have instead "[c]hallenge[d] it, [spoken] out, engage[d] in a constructive act of protest" is facile gibberish, and, as to the idea that he should face the consequences in a trial by a jury of his peers, it would be akin to sheep negotiating with the wolves. What was he going to do, hold up a banner that says "[redacted]"? By the same token, it's ludicrous to expect the American state to pardon Snowden, with or without a petition. Snowden has irretrievably made himself a sworn enemy of the American national security state. The state could not possibly allow its legitimacy and legal supremacy to be undermined by his actions. His situation is not unlike that of politically persecuted activists elsewhere.