Bradley Manning not being tortured anymore?

According to this article, Bradley Manning has been transferred from Quantico to Leavenworth. They are trying to silence their critics who thought his previous confinement amounted to torture. It is a step in the right direction, but they need to try him already. If found guilty of what he is alleged to have done, they can lock him away and throw away the key. Military or no, I hate the idea that anybody can be held indefinitely without conviction.

He is being tried. He was charged in July of 2010 and March 2011, and has got an Article 32 hearing (the military equivalent of a preliminary hearing) scheduled for May/June.

Do they need a trial? The commander in chief has already declared he broke the law, hasn’t he?

Of course they need a trial. I didn’t listen to the audio, but assuming the short quote in your link is correct (and not taken out of context), then Obama spoke “stupidly”, as he is wont to say.

Why on earth would that mean he doesn’t need a trial? Presidents say shit like that all the time. It means nothing.

Presidents do not say shit like that all the time.

I expected better from our constitutional law scholar president than this.

The hell they don’t. Bush not ony declared people guilty but imposed indefinite sentences without trial. The Constitution does not prevent Presidents from saying a person committed a crime, it only prevents the government from imposing a sentence without trial. People misundertand “innocent until proven guilty.” It means nothing outside a courtroom.

Right. Needless to say, the President’s opinion that anyone broke the law isn’t sufficient to find someone guilty under this legal system. He still needs a trial and conviction.

It was a stupid thing to say. I don’t care how many presidents have said it, but I doubt many have said something like this about US citizens being held before trial.

Nixon said it about Charlie Manson, I think.

It’s not about the legal effect of his words. They have no legal effect. It’s about the impropriety of our highest elected official poisoning the well in regards to the guilt or innocence of a criminal defendant in a country where nobody is supposed to be considered guilty until proven to be beyond a reasonable doubt.

Even the leaders of a fake democracy should have enough sense to at least pretend like the rules matter. The government’s pre-trial treatment of Manning speaks volumes.

Why? Is it not a factual statement?

Pretty sure Clinton said it about McVeigh. It still has not been explained to me why it would be inappropriate.

I’d be surprised if he did. Nixon may have been a crook, but he wasn’t stupid.

A cite would clear that up definitively, if you’ve got one.

How about explaining why it’s “stupid” first?

Pro Tip, Dopers: if somebody posts a link in the OP, you should probably click the link if you want to fully understand what is going on.

If it’s not obvious, or you’re not convinced by what has already been posted in this thread, then I doubt there is anything that would explain it to you.

No one has bothered to try yet. It’s just been declared by fiat that “it’s stupid.”

Post 11.

Post #11 is total nonsense. “Poisoning the well,” my ass.