> Isn't the more important point whether or not he exposed serious corruption and illegal activity? We forgive the police breaking the law, in order to enforce it, all the time.. the classic example of speeding to catch a speeder.

But...that's not breaking the law. When speeding is done as part of the police officer's job, it is not breaking the law.

In contrast, when a police officer speeds while not carrying out their duty, that is indeed breaking the law. The Pulitzer Prize for Public Service in 2013 was awarded to an investigation that uncovered illegally speeding cops: http://www.pulitzer.org/winners/7180

> that's not breaking the law. When speeding is done as part of the police officer's job, it is not breaking the law.

By definition, whistleblowing is disclosing information that shouldn't be disclosed.This is why there needs to be whistleblower protection: so that the "illegal" action is no longer considered illegal but a civic duty.

> The Pulitzer Prize for Public Service in 2013 was awarded to an investigation that...

Funny you should mention that, in 2014, the Pulitzer Prize for Public Service was awarded to journalists who worked with material illegally provided by Edward Snowden: http://www.pulitzer.org/winners/7200

>But...that's not breaking the law. When speeding is done as part of the police officer's job, it is not breaking the law.

What about the FBI running a honey pot where they continue to allow children to be abused? Technically legal, but is it really something we should tolerate?