from your tone you obviously already think you know the answers.
It's one thing if these are the ebbs and flows of an open society.
Many people in the natsec apparatus- yes, at the institutional level attacked by Snowden- have counterclaims that Snowden's narrative of his actions and motivations is incomplete, that there is more to the story, that there are other reasons he lives now in Russia, which is not an entity that is conducting an experiment in democracy.
To put Snowden's work in better perspective, I would like to see- his use and sources of cash. That's all. And that's not this book.
There is also the likely possibility he didn't expect to be awarded a medal for uncovering the US governments own surveillance program on its citizens.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/20committee.com/2016/07/02/the-...
Grains of salt with all of this of course. Even if you trust people like Schindler what they mean by "agent" and "op" is going to have significant nuance.
Web of trust, shared semantics, and personal priors especially hard to reason about here, IMV.
Especially in face of repeated requests for clarity and/or specifics.
The initial question might have passed muster (I'd considered giving it the benefit of the doubt). Reading the rest of the thread, it fails badly.