Of course you are. You defend them from consequences of their actions. You're defending their "right" to publish this information. That's support.
Considering how hard the Bush Administration tried to stop this, don't you think they would already be pushing criminal prosecution if it were [illegal]?
No. You know there's more to the decision than that. It's political. If there was, as should be, a public outcry at their treasonous work, then prosecution would have happened. Unfortunately, there's folks who see it as more nuanced.
I'm just responding to calls to punish them for something that was legal.
Willingly and knowingly helping the enemy isn't legal. They were told it would help the enemy if they published. There was, they admit, no reason to publish now for any other reason than to beat their competition. They published anyway. To sell papers.
There isn't some great principle involved here. No scandal of government spying. Just selling newspapers and serving a political agenda at the expense of American lives.
You are over-thinking it. Our people and our freedoms die when we have to think about simple treason.
That is not sufficient grounds to make an act illegal, or the Administration (or any administration) could claim that any number of things it dislikes "help the enemy" in some indirect way and ban them. For an action to be banned, it would generally have to directly endanger American lives (e.g., compromise encryption codes, allowing the enemy to discover American agents).