> he was a Russian asset from the beginning
I didn’t say he was a Russian asset from the beginning. I just said he was probably a traitor from the beginning. That may be quite complicated but he ended up a Russian asset.
I didn’t say he was a Russian asset from the beginning. I just said he was probably a traitor from the beginning. That may be quite complicated but he ended up a Russian asset.
I guess, to me being a traitor has connotations of deliberate intent to do harm due to some kind of external loyalty. While he certainly betrayed the IC, besides him ending up in Russia (which realistically is like one of a handful of countries that would take a guy like that), I’m not aware of any signs he was acting on behalf of anybody except himself
That’s what he said, that’s not necessarily what was actually true. I no longer believe him given his subsequent actions.
> Surely the support for his actions indicates to you there are people out there who would have done what he did
If you’re suggesting that there could have been genuine patriotic whistleblowers, I agree. But Snowden’s actions have proven he’s not genuinely patriotic but a supporter of a genocidal regime.
> to me being a traitor has connotations of deliberate intent to do harm due to some kind of external loyalty
That’s not what the word means. Betrayal of country can occur for any number of reasons, for instance ego or greed are often involved.
I’m guessing you never risked anything in your life, ammirite?
The latter seems far more likely to me as an observer, but in either case, both public revealation AND harm to the US were on the table.