I don't think this was a whistleblower issue. Rather than responding with a yes or no, I think we should consider if breaking a law in the furtherance of whistleblowing is justified. If someone reveals classified information, does claiming "whistle blower" status automatically make the initial crime excusable? I disagree. Otherwise why not make it legal to divulge classified material? Then blowing the whistle can be done safely without fear of prosecution because then no law was broken.
Whistleblowing almost always involves breaking at least one law. The general trend has been to bring in more laws to make it less likely that it is possible legally in any given situation. To say "I support whistleblowing but only if no laws are broken" is almost meaningless.
