If the journalists reporting this aren't even seeing snippets of the conversations that's even worse. Intel agencies for decades have been known to manipulate the press.
Right. If there is a deep Russian conspiracy to undermine government and Trump and many on his team are compromised, surely a leaker would feel confident that he/she would be vindicated for having helped inform the public about it (especially due to the strongly partisan support for anything that would harm Trump's presidency).
> (especially due to the strongly partisan support for anything that would harm Trump's presidency).
If they had the evidence that trump was "being blackmailed by putin" or actively working with Russia to undermine the DNC, how would his presidency survive impeachment?
Snowden did what he did knowing he wasn't going to topple Obama, if you had such explosive information that would protect the republic it just seems a bit much that they would only just relay bits and pieces of information via verbal communication.
– The leaker had listened to discussions, but did not see/have the actual transcripts
– Leaking documents carries much stiffer penalties
– Leaking documents feels worse than talking about them in general terms
– Copies are strictly limited and can only be seen in a guarded document room
- Documents may contain hidden markers to identify leakers
...