The point of Juan Cole's original piece is clearly that Snowden himself is irrelevant to the contents of the leak. Any speech that bases its defense of Fourth Amendment violations on attacking the messenger deserves immediate scorn.
The reason they attack the messenger is because it's easier than attacking the message. The message itself raises doubts as to their standing as defenders of the law.
* The CONTENTS of the leak do not change simply because the messenger is guilty of a criminal act. *
It's entirely reasonable to state that he is a defender of our Constitution and that he is a whistleblower, but that he should be charged for using inappropriate channels. He technically should have approached his chain of command and then members of Congress first before he went to the media.
The point of Juan Cole's original piece is clearly that Snowden himself is irrelevant to the contents of the leak. Any speech that bases its defense of Fourth Amendment violations on attacking the messenger deserves immediate scorn.
The reason they attack the messenger is because it's easier than attacking the message. The message itself raises doubts as to their standing as defenders of the law.
* The CONTENTS of the leak do not change simply because the messenger is guilty of a criminal act. *
It's entirely reasonable to state that he is a defender of our Constitution and that he is a whistleblower, but that he should be charged for using inappropriate channels. He technically should have approached his chain of command and then members of Congress first before he went to the media.