I would say you could skip the entire part about Ames' time in Russia and still get the message, which is that Ames dislikes Greenwald's coverage of the leaks and Snowden because Greenwald demands that everybody see Snowden as a bona fide hero. It's worth noting (and the article mentions this extensively near the end) that Greenwald and Ames have been enemies for the past few years.
Honestly I think the article could do without the comparison to so-called "real" martyrs. The point that he makes around the middle:
"But I’ve been frustrated as Hell watching Snowden’s politics, and the politics of his diehard supporters, and the strategically flawed, manipulative decision by his handlers at the Guardian to preemptively convince the public that Snowden is a hero, an infallible “historical” figure who must be worshipped by anyone who considers themselves aligned with history."
is a good one to investigate, and I'm inclined to agree with Ames when he says
"So for me, the importance of what we’ve learned about the NSA spying programs doesn’t hinge on whether or not I have a cult-like faith in Snowden’s and Greenwald’s “heroism” as “true patriots” unlike the other team’s guys. But the problem has been, from the start, that Snowden’s and Greenwald’s network of supporters created this false consensus, and thought-policed anyone who dared deviate or think for themselves."
However the article is too long and unfocused, and I think it suffers as a result.
There, I saved you 10 minutes and a lot of scrolling.