Yes. You are completely right. It’s just interesting because there are so many crimes where the recipients of illegally obtained information or product are considered as culpable as those who actually stole it. That this isn’t one of them probably is to the benefit of the press, which was your original point.
I still have trouble getting my head around the idea that this is even the case if the illegally obtained information is provided by a foreign agent, and the recipient turns around and puts it in the hands of the American public (and directly or indirectly encourages that foreign agent to do it even more), because they know it will accrue to their benefit, instead of going to the F.B.I. Again, I can think of one or two times in my career where I received information that seemed to be the direct product of spying, and that’s when we called the F.B.I. But maybe it’s just a question of ethics or practices, not legality.