Listening to Jeff Toobin offer his opinions about Edward Snowden and his disclosures about NSA gathering of information on American citizens, he sounded more like Pat Buchanan attacking Daniel Ellsberg than anything resembling an objective journalist.
In fact there was not one word out of Toobin's mouth, not one, intellectually, philosophically or morally, that could not be applied to Daniel Ellsberg's taking the Pentagon Papers to the New York Times during the height of the Viet Nam war. Except based on Toobin's attempts at logic, to follow his thinking, one can easily argue that what Ellsberg did was much worse than Snowden, since at the time, the country was very much in a real war in Viet Nam.
What makes Toobin's assessment so intellectually and philosophically dishonest is that if he were asked if everything he said about Snowden also applied to Daniel Ellsberg and did Ellsberg deserve to go to prison as a traitor, everyone knows Toobin would back off that in a nano second and sound more like Ralph Kramden stuttering "homina homina homina" than anyone giving a thoughtful opinion worth considering. Meaning, in blunt terms, Toobin's opinions are worthless because they don't stand up to any kind of historical scrutiny or Toobin's hysterical scrutiny since at their core they are intellectually and philosophically dishonest. Because it is a virtual certainty Toobin wouldn't be willing to apply anything he had to say about Snowden to Daniel Ellsberg and wouldn't, at least publicly anyway, sympathize with president Nixon and the Nixon administration and join them in calling Ellsberg a traitor.
In fact Toobin knows it would probably destroy his credibility and his public career as a commentator if he kept his argument and opinions consistent and honest and showed sympathy and empathy for Nixon and the Nixon administration's rage over Ellsberg's release of the Pentagon Papers to the New York Times which in the end led to the Nixon abuses called Watergate.
There is not a hairs breadth difference between anything Toobin had to say about Edward Snowden and what he did, and Daniel Ellsberg and what he did. Especially on the issue of morality which was one of Toobin's arguments when he called what Snowden did "immoral" ( as an aside, Ellsberg has called Snowden's leak more important that his release of the Pentagon Papers and "the most significant leak in American history).