> Holder said “we are in a different place as a result of the Snowden disclosures” and that “his actions spurred a necessary debate” that prompted President Obama and Congress to change policies on the bulk collection of phone records of American citizens.

Hmm. "We stepped up and fixed all the problems, so there is no need to continue the debate." I guess at face value it's kind of nice to say, but it doesn't carry a lot of weight since it's not an official statement. The current AG spokesperson is quoted, "I can say our position regarding bringing Edward Snowden back to the United States to face charges has not changed." It doesn't exactly contradict striking a deal, but it doesn't sound very open to doing so.

> informal discussions of... a plea bargain in which Snowden returns to the United States, pleads guilty to one felony count and receives a prison sentence of three to five years in exchange for full cooperation with the government.

Seems problematic. What is "full cooperation" -- enumerating all docs? What if they say they don't believe him and the deal is off? Does he have to agree to discrediting himself in order to get people to put less stock in anything attributed to the "Snowden disclosures"? Publicly thank them for the aforementioned policy changes and shed tears saying it's exactly what he set out to do -- we can stop pushing for more change?