It's pretty much impossible for any judge or jury to find him not guilty of all charges when he leaked over 700000 documents that had absolutely nothing to do with anything illegal that the government was doing. If he had only stolen and leaked incriminating information, his case would have been much stronger.

> If he had only stolen and leaked incriminating information, his case would have been much stronger.

I don't think that's true under USC and even less likely to be true under UCMJ

Well, this judge acquitted him for leaking the video of American troops killing civilians. That's one of the key things that I'm basing my opinion on.

He was found guilty on every charge except aiding the enemy. Why do you think he was acquitted?

He took classified data outside his purview and provided it to folks without access, which seems like pretty clear espionage. You don't have to be working for a particular foreign government to be performing espionage.

Espionage is not just spying for someone, it's the act of obtaining the information illicitly, which he did.

He was spying on the American government for the American people.