Judge deliberates Breanna’s fate; NY Times wrings hands
The Associated Press reports that the defense has rested in the Breanna Manning spy trial and now the judge will deliberate the outcome in her mind, since Breanna chose to not have a jury;
Army Col. Denise Lind began deliberating Friday after nearly two months of conflicting evidence and arguments about the 25-year-old intelligence analyst. A military judge, not a jury, is hearing the case at Manning’s request.
Lind said she will give a day’s public notice before reconvening the court-martial to announce her findings. The most serious charge is aiding the enemy, which carries a potential life sentence in prison.
Meanwhile, the New York Times frets over the prosecutor’s closing argument that Manning is guilty of “aiding the enemy”.
That charge has never been brought in a leak case, and the theory behind it could establish a precedent with implications for investigative journalism in the Internet era. But Major Fein said it was justified in Private Manning’s case. Prosecutors are seeking a life sentence.
“Pfc. Manning was not a humanist; he was a hacker,” Major Fein said, adding: “He was not a whistle-blower. He was a traitor, a traitor who understood the value of compromised information in the hands of the enemy and took deliberate steps to ensure that they, along with the world, received it.”
So, the Times is worried that, if Manning is found guilty, it will have a chilling effect on the people that the New York Times depends upon to excoriate political entities the Times doesn’t like – disloyal traitors. As well they should be.
As with Eddie Snowden, my dislike of Manning stems from the fact that he took an oath and broke the oath, it doesn’t matter what the information was that either of them released to the public, it’s that we can’t have a precedence set that low level intelligence operatives get to declassify and release information to whomever and where ever they see fit. Immature little princesses don’t get to decide what information gets released to our enemies.
If Manning and Snowden get away with their treachery, it devalues the oaths, and if we can’t take each other at our words, what is left of society?
Category: Shitbags
One day per item released without authority – served consecutively. That’s all I ask.
Hopefully the Judge will have the common and legal sense to find Manning guilt and hand out a life sentence. That is my hope, short of a firing squad.
Sparks: there’ll be no firing squad. The Army doesn’t do that any more – military executions are now by lethal injection. And in any case, the Army took the death penalty off the table before Manning’s trial started.
@3 All I can say is…Bummer.
Sparks: actually, although I think Manning richly deserves execution for aiding the enemy I’m quite glad Manning can’t face a firing squad.
A firing squad is a dignified, military execution. IMO, turncoats don’t deserve that kind of a dignified exit from this world.
I’d prefer an old-style hanging (well, that’s the one the Constitution would permit). Barring that, seeing such a detestable POS put to death like an animal is OK.
I’ll also settle for true life in prison. Since Manning’s alleged to have released at least 250,000 documents without authority, then one day per – served consecutively – also works. That works out to somewhat over 684 years.
@5 You are correct in your assessment of Manning not being deserving of any military dignities, whatsoever. Just my emotions talking.
A charge of aiding the enemy has NEVER been brought in a leak case?
So, what Benedict Arnold did doesn’t count as a type of leak?
How can this set a precedence for journalists? Unless we are going to conscript any and all accused leakers into the military and subject them to UCMJ, I don’t think (could be wrong) any decision made in this case would be applicable to the civilian criminal justice system. But I guess it sounds good and will get the left spun up.
How breanna being guilty of aiding and abetting the enemy has any effect on the press is beyond me. That little waste of DNA is nothing more than a traitorous little bitch who by rights should swing from the nearest oak tree. He doesn’t even deserve the expense of a gallows being built for him. They could wait for snowden and find a big enough tree for the two of them.
Get a rope! plz
Amen!
I know that nobody will like this comment, but I kind of think Manning should get a break just because he was kept in solitary confinement for so damn long prior to even being tried for these crimes. You can’t keep an inmate in solitary confinement for months on end for no apparent reason other than punishing them. I personally think he’s suffered enough based on that alone. But that’s just my opinion.
@12: Bradley got three squares a day, a bed (with or without pillow), and his medical needs were attended to.
Jail is not supposed to be comfortable.
Ask the intell agents, the foreign assets Bradley got arrested or killed, how much they’ve suffered.
Hang the bitch.
He’s suffered enough? How much is he paying you to make a stupid remark like that? Huh?
Will you be quite so generous if the information that was leaked to Julian Assange’s group of miscreants is used against free societies like ours to destroy us?
@12 my opinion is that your opinion is shit. Go cry about his “suffering” somewhere else. Maybe go visit the burn center at Brook Army MC if you think anything this oxygen thief has experienced remotely equates to suffering. Ass.
Wonder how Jax’s story might change if it were a family member that was killed because of the release of information by this traitor.
Maybe he should be in a 5-star hotel instead of jail – that place that criminal are housed. Or maybe he really should be placed in the general population. Wonder how long he would live there?
“Lind said she will give a day’s public notice before reconvening the court-martial to announce her findings.”
I’m willing to bet she’s already made up her mind, and just wants a day to get drunk.
If he does not get at least one life sentence I will throw away my Army Good Conduct Medal. I will do it in public in front of an Army Recruiting Center. I don’t think this asshat will survive very long in a Military prison unless he is placed in solitary confinement. My wish is that he goes into GenPop.
@12: Breanna was put in solitary confinement because he threatened to kill himself. He was treated just like every other inmate who pulls the same stuff.
Please get back to me when you’re feeling the same level of empathy for the people who got hurt or killed because of what he did.
1. Rope.
2. Tree (or Gallows).
3. Breanna Manning.
Some assembly required.
Life Without Parole would do nicely as well. That way, he’ll have every day of the rest of his life in the USDB at Ft. Leavenworth to contemplate if what he did was worth the consequences.
@20: I’m sure a succession of Pvt. Bubbas will be helping Breanna contemplate.
@21: At least he will learn his value in cigarettes.
I don’t really agree with Manning’s choice, I feel more torn on Snowden’s choice. I think ultimately they both made their choices and should receive their punishment.
But ultimately to say your only problem is they broke an oath seems wrong to me. The idea is scary in itself. There have been many groups throughout history that have taken oaths, and then ordered to carry out ghastly things. The oath is to defend America, in their minds they believe they are protecting America. If the government is violating the rights of their citizens, someone has to stand up to them, because the oath is to defend America, and the Constitution, not to defend politicians.
@12 – “Suffering” ? WTF? You are a pathetic bedwetter.
Point of Order for Roger in Republic, the establish protocol for tossing away earned, and some no so erned but received because you kissed ass, is over the White House fence. I believe the esteemed Secretary of State established that precedent in the 70’s.
With regards to the little prick’s sentence, bunga-bunga would be too good for him and he would probably enjoy it. Put him up against the wall with no blindfold and raffle the firing positions to benefit the Wounded Warrior Project.
Jonn,
Can’t say I agree that the “implications for investigative journalism” remark in the NYT story about “aiding and abetting” as a precedent is all about political axe grinding. What the reporter was actually doing, at least it seems to me, was trying to provide a context for the stakes involved. It’s a debate that’s been fairly heated at a meta-journalism level for weeks, and involves the related issue of who should, or should not, be considered a legitimate news outlet.
Here’s a crude hypothetical:
In theory, the DoD could decide tomorrow that a DD-214 is no longer a matter of public record because it could provide useful data to enemy combatants, and its release also violates an individual’s privacy under the Fourth Amendment. Since the DD-214 information would then be considered classified, not only would the person who revealed it be subject to arrest, but also a crew such as TAH who publish it.
Obviously, such a decision would have implications for the ability of TAH to take issue with stolen valor slimeballs and, if their information is revealed, provide a means for them to become victims instead of the swine they are.
Sometimes the dynamic for this, and it’s perpetual, seems like the old Bogart scene in High Sierra.
The press is always going to want to say: Show us your badges!
And the government is always going to want to say: Badges? We don’t need to show you no stinkin’ badges…
@23: fair point. How about that he put American lives, and foreign intell assets’ lives (probably caused many of them to get killed), by releasing their names and personally identifiable information through a-hole Assange? Is that enough for you?
@12 If we want your opinion we’ll beat it out of you. You’re pissing up the wrong tree trying to drum up sympathy for that lowlife POS.
@21, ExHack, he’d probably enjoy being Bubba & Thor’s bitchboy, that’s why I think Solitary Confinement would be best for that traitorous little shit. That’s why I say keep him in his cell 23 hours every day with his one hour in an exercise pen for the rest of his life!
@27 Like I said, I don’t agree with Manning. There’s a big difference between releasing information that outs what your government may or may not be doing they shouldn’t be, and releasing information that costs American’s lives.
I don’t plan to stand up for Manning or Snowden, my only problem is with the tone of “As with Eddie Snowden, my dislike of Manning stems from the fact that he took an oath and broke the oath, it doesn’t matter what the information was that either of them released to the public”. There are times when similar actions may not only be the right thing to do, but the only real choice if you’re looking out for Americans. Falling in rank and file can be just as dangerous as treason.
But, who am I, or you, or Snowden, or Manning to know what should or shouldn’t be made public. In their minds I’m sure they feel like heroes, but where Manning fails at least, is to look at the consequences of actions. Manning isn’t a hero, he’s just a punk. I don’t know much about Snowden so I won’t comment.
I am surprised IVAW is not all over his nuts.
Toss in the turd Brandon Bryant as well.
The slug is charged with Violation of Art. 104 and our favorite Art 134. Search the web for the charge sheet and then look up all that in the MCM. Makes for interesting reading. Mainly because any crime listed in 18USC is chargeable through Art 134.
On the side look up the language of Art 104, just apply the fact set to the law, drop the hammer and process his last PCS move, well maybe next to the last.
Remember, your mileage may vary.
Ventre a Terre
[…] Ain’t Hell has a bunch of great posts up today including this one by Jonn called “Judge deliberates Breanna’s fate; NY Times wrings […]
@34: I understand the distinction you’re making. I have also sworn a similar oath. That oath is to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. If my orders and official duties come into conflict with that oath, I will have the choice of violating my oath or resigning (which, in fairness to Bradley the Special Little Snowflake, he didn’t have the option of doing – he would’ve had to violate his orders; however, that is also assuming his orders were unlawful, and IMHO that’d be pretty much an ASS-umption.) I think that if Bradley had stopped at releasing the Apache video, he MIGHT have been able to make the argument that he violated his orders, but to his best ability stayed true to his oath. However, the release of the other 249,999 or so documents shoots a wide bloody hole in that argument.
There were avenues he could’ve taken to stay true to his oath, if he really believed there was a conflict between his oath and his duty, that stopped miles short of treason and aiding the enemies of the United States.
He didn’t take any of those avenues, because this wasn’t about his oath or his conscience. This was and is about Bradley the Special Snowflake’s puffed-up ego, self-importance, and delusions of grandeur. For one moment, Bradley was a very important person in the sense that he held our Nation’s secrets in his hand. With great power comes great responsibility. Instead of treating these secrets with the responsibility and duty they were due, Bradley threw them out into the world and betrayed the power and used no responsibility, and he did it only to make himself feel like a big man. Bradley Manning played a stupid, murderous game, and he’s about to win a lifetime supply of stupid prizes.
Sorry, that last was at William @30.
What “Manning” should get is a slow garrote and a gibbet for the sport of the crows.
But he did far less damage than “Choom” has done…
Life in prison is okay.
Sometime in late 1966(?) two of us took a convoy down to Long Binh Supply Base to pick up some resupply of something. That base was HUGE. Driving around trying to find where we were supposed to arrive, we drove past LBJ (Long Binh Jail). It seemed like hundreds of guys were strolling around inside the wire. Lots of wire and guard towers. I would not want to be there. Sometime later there was a riot and several prisoners were shot.
Perhaps Bradley should have researched what a military lockup could be.
My best offer is to put him in a kim jon un camo outfit lettered all over with “I hate you great leader!” and push him out over north korea.
Let them deal with him, snowden too? perhaps… He deserves it too.
[…] Current Events: Bradley Manning Trial […]
I don’t want Manning killed. He’s young. He should get life. As it’s a Federal beef, he won’t get parole. Life, forever, in a land where soap is notoriously hard to keep from dropping, is what he deserves.
Death sentence would be a mercy.
William: following your argument to its logical conclusion discloses a serious problem in what you propose above. Who is allowed to decide what is “improperly classified” due to reasons of “government wrongdoing” and thus should be released?
You imply that this decision can legitimately be made by anyone who sees something that he/she feels is “wrong”. That, amigo, is not consistent with current Federal law and policy. Further, such a policy would also be manifestly ill-advised, bordering on blatantly stupid. It would allow any self-centered dipstick with a grudge to disclose classified information for revenge with the justification “I felt I was exposing wrongdoing” as his/her shield. Um, no.
By law and policy, the decision of who is authorized to make decisions regarding the declassification of information and release of same to others (including reporters and the general public) has already been made. For many categories of material, it’s set at a rather high level – for good reason. I’ll give you a hint: the list of individuals authorized to do that doesn’t include Army PFCs and/or IT support contractors working for a Federal agency.
Bottom line: neither Manning nor Snowden were whistleblowers exposing wrongdoing. Rather, both Manning and Snowden were simply self-centered “special little snowflakes” who found out the hard way they really weren’t all that special, didn’t get their way, and decided to extract revenge as they saw fit. Had either been a bona fide whistleblower, they’d have at least attempted to raise the issues they unlawfully disclosed within proper channels first.
Best I can gather from published reports, neither ever did.
Hey, like I said, my opinion isn’t popular and I’m aware of that. I wouldn’t bother posting on here at all if I didn’t like hearing others’ opinions about things. My understanding is that he was placed in SHU and kept there even after he said he was not suicidal. Prison isn’t supposed to be comfortable and it’s not, but there’s a reason there is a general population and then a SHU….and there’s a reason why SHU is only reserved for those determined to truly be a risk. Corrections officers aren’t there to punish the inmates. That’s what the courts are for. The way this story has been spun, it sounds as though he was kept there because the CO’s at Quantico were mad at what he was accused of doing and wanted to heap on the punishment. Again, that’s the way the story has been spun and I wasn’t actually there so I don’t know what was done or said to warrant putting him in SHU for so long. But I am sympathetic to him after seeing the inside of a SHU and seeing the conditions. It’s important to remember that even criminals are human beings. Some of the SHU inmates truly deserve to be there, believe me I know that…..and those inmates can stay there for all I care. But Manning hasn’t even been found guilty of a crime yet and he’s already spent quite a long time inside a SHU….with the possibility of spending the rest of his life in prison.
Jax,kept in SHU, for his own protection. If placed in Gen Pop. Bradley would live long. The inmates do not like or allow to live because they are still have a sense of Honor. Joe
I haven’t read a news story yet that said he was there for protective custody. I guess that is feasible though. I know what sort of crimes get an inmate looked down upon in civilian prisons, but I don’t really know what military criminals look down upon. I’ve never heard of a computer hacker getting the shit beat out of them just for being involved in hacking though.
@23 For clarification, US Soldiers do not take an oath to defend America AND the Constitution…they only take an oath to defend the Constitution. Now I know that sounds a bit off at first glance, but allow me to elaborate… Oath of Enlistment- “I, (state your name), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.” The key words here are, “I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic”. For example- If a group of people, deemed an enemy of The United States of America, were to attack the US, US Soldiers would not fight that group to defend America. They would fight that group to defend the Constitution… which establishes the union, its common defense and the freedoms and rights of America. I know this sounds like a play on words, but understand that all citizens of the US have the right to defend themselves against enemies as well…hence the Second Amendment. Now, why does this matter? PVT Bradley Manning has neither supported nor defended the Constitution by leaking the information he did. In fact, he has done the complete opposite. He valued his own infamy over his oath. If he felt that the Constitution(or rights of the people) was in jeopardy because of what he saw/read on a secret classified network, then he should have used a tool given to all Soldiers in cases where they feel someone has broken that oath. That tool is called the Office of the Inspector General or “IG” as Soldiers call it. The IG exists in a completely separate Chain of Command(CoC) than a Soldier’s CoC. This Command relationship exists this way so that Soldiers who utilize them cannot receive reprisal… Read more »
@43 PVT Manning did not perform “hacking”. He made a self-conscious choice to physically extract information from a classified network (saved it onto a CD using his classified computer) and then brought it to his own personal computer to upload it to wikileaks. In other words…digital espionage.
The term “hacking” infers that someone, without proper credentialed access, gains unlawful access into a computer system to extract data, manipulate computer code and/or corrupt the database upon which this information resides. PVT Manning had proper and lawful credentialed access to the system per his Oath and Security Clearance, thus he “hacked” nothing. He just betrayed the entire United States of his own freewill…that’s all.
Anonymous in JAX, where do you get the information that Manning was a hacker?
He wasn’t. He was an intel analyst assigned to work on high-end security information. He passed it on to Julian Assange, the wikileaks creature, who decided long ago that it was more important to be an idiot and put people in danger than it was to respect the law.
That’s your first mistake. Manning was NOT a hacker. He was GIVEN access to those secure systems as part of his job. He screwed the pooch in pursuit of making a name for himself, and in the process leaked information that jeopardized other people’s lives and got them killed.
So where do you get the information that Manning was a hacker?
Maybe hacker wasn’t the right term to use. I like the term used in #45, digital espionage. I still don’t think he would need to be in protective custody for his safety. I think you’re giving too much credit to the “honor” of the other inmates. They don’t like child molesters and they don’t like rapists, but I don’t think they’d give a shit about Manning’s crimes.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but you, Jax, obviously have no knowledge of incarceration in general, or, as you have admitted, military incarceration. So why exactly should anyone take your opinion seriously when just about everyone else here has a bunch of experience with the honor even a lowly thief in the military can have?
But, do keep expressing your silliness. We will keep laughing at it. Entertainment is the only value your opinion seems to have on this particular topic.
Segregation has many uses in the prison system. It is used to protect individuals from other inmates and to protect inmates from certain individuals. Sometimes groups (e.g., sexual predators, likely victims, snitches) are segregated, and sometimes individuals are. No one–especially a high-profile inmate–is willy-nilly segregated unless the regulations and rules governing segregation are violated. I don’t know why Manning was segregated but I am confident that there was a sound and reasonable basis for doing so.
Rapists aren’t targeted inmates in prison, unless they are child rapists. Sometimes I think, Jax, that you just make stuff up and either hope no one knows any better or that you luck out and get it right. You, as you say, are free to opine but, as you should know by now, some opinions, being uneducated and based on insufficient fact, are all but worthless.
#48, actually I do have experience with incarceration. I’m fairly new to it, but I’m working with the Federal Bureau of Prisons now. This week I’m scheduled as a housing unit officer. Like I said, I’m new to it, but I think that counts. Just sayin.