1. There's no guarantee that he acted alone and or without outside sponsorship.
2. There's no guarantee that all the information that he took was released publicly. It would be helpful to know the extent of what was taken, and who else knows it.
3. It would be helpful to know what other intelligence services have asked him/taken from him.
> 1. There's no guarantee that he acted alone and or without outside sponsorship.
That has been debated and put to rest.
Our elected officials initially tried to say he was a Russian spy, but could not provide any evidence to support the claim.
If he were a foreign asset, like for the Russians, for example, he would not have acted the way he did. In fact, his handlers would have preferred that he continued to operate in secret and continue to feed them as much info as he can.
I recall he took pretty much everything there was to take, including the active operations db, and only released a small fraction of documents to Poitras/Greenwald. Those 2 drives full of docs were hastily dumped inside the HK airport on his way to Moscow and are no doubt in the hands of Chinese spy agencies (who also were likely set up beside his hotel room in HK trying to get his passwords).
We don't know what he knows. It is entirely likely that he has information - or had access to information - that could have serious national security ramifications, perhaps as a bargaining chip.
The NSA could guess what he had access to, but it's harder to know what he still has. That's a very scary known unknown.
1. There's no guarantee that he acted alone and or without outside sponsorship.
2. There's no guarantee that all the information that he took was released publicly. It would be helpful to know the extent of what was taken, and who else knows it.
3. It would be helpful to know what other intelligence services have asked him/taken from him.
4 "To encourage the others"