Like it would matter for any of the revelations. And like he would have other choices to not go to prison. Look at how it worked out for Assange.
And they did manage to get the word out. They are both relatively free now, but it is true, they both paid a price.
Idealism is that you follow your principles despite that price, not escaping/evading the consequences.
(And he is also the reason why Snowden ended up in Russia. Though it's possible that the flight plan they had was still the best one in that situation.)
I am increasingly wondering what there remains of the supposed superiority of the Western system if we're willing to compromise on everything to suit our political ends.
The point was supposed to be that the truth is worth having out there for the purpose of having an informed public, no matter how it was (potentially) obtained.
In the end, we may end up with everything we fear about China but worse infrastructure and still somehow think we're better.
What if he simply decided that the information he obtained is worth having out there no matter the source? It seems to me that you're simply upset that he dared to do so and are trying very hard to come up with a rationalization for why he's a Bad Guy(tm) for daring to turn the tables. It's a transparent and rather lackluster attempt to shift the conversation from what to who.
It was Russia, or vanish into a black site, never to be seen or heard from again.