Ok, I'll bite. What sort of hypothetical could warrant such an action, intentionally leaking this story?
Do they want to reassure us of their best efforts in protecting us from terrorism?
I can't imagine a scenario existing where the tables might eventually turn & those who were once appalled & angry that the NSA was so into everything change their minds and become reassured that the gov't is actually on their game & has the means to get some outrageous terrorist threat we couldn't have imagined under control again because of their broad wiretapping capabilities.
Security reassurance is something I hadn't thought of, but I think you are right that this leak goes way too far for that to work. I don't believe this either...but if I wore a tinfoil-hat I would point out that:
1) The NSA "leak" is not really news because it was reported in 2006[1].
2) "Bad" publicity from it is the beginning of Obama's 2nd term downfall which is happening too soon in his 2nd term for us to be angry enough to elect a Libertarian 2016. It'll be an opportune time to usher in an all-talk small government Republican in 2016 to maintain Red State vs. Blue State illusion. Even if the Repub doesn't win, it'll look like the election was a close ideological fight, which is all that matters in the eyes of the public. Of course, all 2016 candidates will continue to support the NSA oversight regardless of what they say during their campaign, so it won't matter whether red or blue gets the oval office.
Do they want to reassure us of their best efforts in protecting us from terrorism?
I can't imagine a scenario existing where the tables might eventually turn & those who were once appalled & angry that the NSA was so into everything change their minds and become reassured that the gov't is actually on their game & has the means to get some outrageous terrorist threat we couldn't have imagined under control again because of their broad wiretapping capabilities.