No because

1. His so-called journalistic activities amounted to grooming vulnerable government employees

2. He actively hacked the government

3. He had a hit list of data he was grooming a government employee to collaboratively hack

4. His work product was to release thousands of pages, unredacted, containing the names of agents and collaborator personnel who were left in "grave and imminent risk of serious physical harm"

If you had read the justice.gov link I posted above then you would not be calling him a journalist.

That's how I can tell you didn't read it