I enjoy Juan Cole's commentary tremendously, but this particular post uses a sneaky trick (ironically, one he calls out the government for using). Read the list of "tools of propaganda, demonization, and distortion"

1. Snowden will be called a traitor. This is indeed propaganda. (Note though that nobody in the administration has called Snowden a traitor; the false implied equivalence between the random utterances of a Congressman who was elected with ~200,000 votes and an administration led by someone who got ~65,000,000 votes is also a problem, but not the problem I have here).

2. Snowden will be called a defector. Also propaganda. (Also not an administration claim).

3. Questions will be raised about Snowden’s mental balance. Also propaganda. (Also not an administration claim).

4. It will be alleged that Snowden does not understand the secret programs. NOT PROPAGANDA. It is entirely legitimate to challenge Snowden's grasp of what NSA was doing, especially in the wake of his more extravagant claims, such as his apparent belief that he was keystrokes away from the contents of anyone's email, including the President.

5. Government spokesmen will assert without evidence that his allegations are simply untrue. Also propaganda.

6. Charges Snowden did not make will be denied. Also propaganda.

7. It will be alleged that the domestic surveillance is legal. NOT PROPAGANDA. In fact, calling it propaganda does harm to the cause of civil liberties, which needs to engage the fact that a majority of Americans have elected representatives that have made it perilously easy for organizations like NSA and (more worrisome) the FBI to expand domestic surveillance.

8. A small, uncontroversial part of his charges will be admitted Also propaganda.

9. It will be alleged that Snowden has aided terrorists Also propaganda. (Also not an administration claim). Note that this is also the same thing as calling him a "traitor".

10. It will be alleged that what Snowden did was wrong. NOT PROPAGANDA. Reasonable people can disagree about whether it's acceptable for someone who swore oaths not to disclose intelligence material should have released that material wholesale to Glenn Greenwald; about whether it's reasonable for one person's judgement to usurp the judgement of an entire elected government; about whether Snowden adequately minimized the material he disclosed to advance his specific justifiable cause, especially in light of the fact that even Greenwald hasn't revealed all the material he got. There is a world of difference between deceptive propaganda and a policy debate.

See the trick here? Cole isn't just foreshadowing the tactics that might be used against Snowden, but also using the list to foreclose on legitimate questions (regarding Snowden's competence and the trustworthiness of his claims, about the actual legal status of NSA's programs, and about the legitimacy of wholesale leaking as a strategy for effecting change) by framing them alongside things that clearly are propaganda (like calling people "traitors", saying they're "aiding enemies", &c).

(Biases on the table: if I were President, there'd be a universal bacon entitlement program, I'd see Snowden prosecuted for overtly and recklessly breaking the law, but would commute his sentence. I have a much bigger problem with Glenn Greenwald, who I think is just as deceptive as the government, but can't imagine that anything he did should be illegal.)