Amnesty for Snowden

This once seemed far-fetched but after a NSA insider raised the possibility on "60 Minutes" it's now generating discussion--much of it aimed at shooting down the idea.  But leave it to the great Amy Davidson of The New Yorker to pen a deep piece showing why amnesty may be in everyone's interest and may yet happen.  One excerpt:

Snowden has done the country good; he has earned his freedom . That is a line of reason that some in the government will have a hard time accepting. But there are a dozen conversations that would not be taking place without his revelations—conversations with consequences, as illustrated by Judge Richard Leon’s finding, earlier this week, that the N.S.A.’s bulk collection of metadata is likely unconstitutional. Nor is it credible to say that Snowden could have done what he did without breaking the law, not when we have also learned that the normal instruments of oversight and judicial review were broken. When Clapper lied to Wyden, that sealed the case for amnesty. Isn’t that why there is such a thing as amnesty—to square circles like these?