You can admit guilt and plead innocent. It's weird, but it's true. And the jury can acquit in spite of overwhelming evidence of guilt. That's how the anglosaxon system of criminal justice works (or used to; perhaps this is only true now in the U.S.?).

Demonstrating gross breach of legality and trust by intelligence agencies? In other countries, leadership of those agencies who lied to Congress (or their version of the legislative branch) would’ve done time.

It boggles the mind that some can attempt to justify the egregious actions of the US intelligence community while supporting the railroading of a whistleblower. Perhaps the intelligence community could be more responsible and compliant with statute, negating the need for whistleblowers to reveal their illegal activities.