Like Count Chocula?

That isn't actually true. The contractor protections were not as firm, but they apparently existed. (And from what I've read that has been addressed now.) And I'm pretty sure that would be a moot question if he had gone to Congress.

You are on much better ground when you discuss 2nd Amendment issues then on this one.

Contrast these two statements:

A) Someone somewhere in the city would like to harm you.

B) Your neighbor Bob plans to throw five Molotov cocktails now in his garage through several of your windows tonight at 2:00 AM and shoot your family as they come screaming out the door.

Do you think there is a useful difference in specificity there? Details matter. The claim that the terrorists "just knew already" is bullshit and a whitewash. Terrorist groups have changed their communication methods since Snowden's leaks and intelligence has been lost because of it.

He could have gone to Congress. Maybe you aren't aware of it, but under the US Constitution the Congress has special powers that are quite useful in situations like this.

Not if he had gone to Congress, no.

He stole ~ 1.7 million highly classified intelligence documents, fled the country, and started leaking them to whomever wanted a copy - at least as far as we have direct proof. He could have covertly done far worse. The description doesn't seem unreasonable.

I guess you don't count the fact that the US Federal government is spending billions of dollars to try to repair some of the damage from Snowden's theft and leaks as detrimental. You'll be helping to pay for that since you live in the US. No doubt GCHQ will be paying some bills as well.

There has certainly been other fallout from that, but apparently we can count on you to never go looking for it.

Unfortunately for your argument the intelligence business does not operate according to the prescriptions of technical information theory. Secondary and alternate sources of information are important as part of judging the reliability of other sources, adding context, and evaluating it. Those sorts of considerations don't really apply in trying to move bits from here to there, do they? You also seem to be committing the common fallacy of assuming that the Russians and Chinese already knew everything that Snowden took before he stole it without any proof of that, and probably because it whitewashes Snowden's crime.

That would be a very useful rumor to spread for a spy planning to engage in a scheme of political warfare. Truly a masterpiece.

Unfortunately it doesn't pass the smell test. Why bring all that extra equipment if you are fleeing?

I'm pretty sure I can correct false statements in the posts I respond to regardless of the framing of the story.

Maybe you haven't noticed that Snowden leaked a LOT more material than just that. And that is assuming that the Russians don't have everything he had.

That is absolute bullshit on the face of it. As a minimum they have what is being published in every newspaper around the world, which isn't trivial, especially since they often pursue independent lines of stories. You wouldn't try to deny that would you? And that is assuming that they either don't have a source inside the papers that is a volunteer, a plant, or bought for a few million dollars. Who is vetting the people in the newspapers? I'm pretty sure they don't have Top Secret clearances. That also assumes that the Russians, Chinese, or the intelligence agencies of other nations haven't simply engaged in a break-in to steal the information. And that is all before you even get to the question of Snowden being disgruntled long before he stole the information and the possibility that he was actively working with the Russians or Chinese. Snowden was apparently lying for years before he stole that information, and his contacts with the Russians and Chinese in Hong Kong leave many questions. It was no surprise to the Russians when Snowden landed in Russia. Snowden or his handlers is engaged in a minor magic act, a little misdirection, a few documents pulled out of the hat with the right banter, and everyone in the audience is a true believer. He did make that rabbit appear from nowhere! He really is a true magician! He really did do it for us!

Meanwhile, today in Russia, Snowden asked Putin on TV:
Snowden: Do you spy like the US?
Putin: Of course not! That isn't legal in Russia. And we don't have the means of the rich West. And it is all tightly controlled by the government and courts.

There is a sucker born every minute.

So you are saying your ignorance of the evidence convinces you of your position?

Apparently you aren't familiar with termites.

And even better, you apparently don't seem to have the imagination to see how knowledge of where and how surveillance systems operate could allow you to avoid them or mitigate against them? And you claim to be a system architect?

Russia has just admitted that it really did move members of its armed forces into Crimea prior to the annexation. How do you think they managed that without people catching on?

It's the same Constitution. It is just that some people don't understand it and how it applies. You may be in that category.

You can thank the Democratic Congress for the massively increased spending just as you can thank the Republican Congress that Clinton had for the fiscal discipline.

You could try moving to Vermont.

Vermont's Single-Payer Dream