If you drive drunk, should you be let off if you don’t kill anyone?
How many DUIs does it take to get 35 years?
Too many.
I’ll drink to that!
Manning didn’t vet the stuff she leaked - she just grabbed everything she could and handed it over wholesale to Assuage. That, at the very least, is reckless disregard for the lives of her fellow soldiers.
Not happy but not angry about it either.
Earlier in the thread it is mentioned that Manning would be eligible to start going up for parole some time after 8 years served? If so and if we count time served pre-conviction towards the total (as is usually the case) that would have put the likely first shot at parole sometime in late 2018 as opposed to early 2017.
This decision then looks like a case of “hooo, dear, those motions are going to get shredded and then set on fire the instant they come in the door, aren’t they? … oh WTH, we’re 2 day lame ducks might as well take this hit too”.
Executive clemency AFAIK is irreversible (as long as any conditions, if imposed, are fulfilled), but as a commutation, not a pardon, the conviction stands, for what that’s worth. Upon completion of the shortened sentence, I must assume Manning will be dishonorably discharged from the service and AIUI that would result in ineligibility for any continued benefits so Uncle Sam will be off the hook for further support for transition or for any other conditions attended to during the terms of enlistment and of imprisonment.
Like I said earlier, I did not mind much Manning serving “hard” time - it’s what’s coming to someone who committed this particular offense (as long as there’s no targeting for special abuse) and his earlier clemency pleas were unconvincing. I would have been cool with time being served and release considered under normal parameters for the charge, as opposed to a demand to either release early or to do every last blasted second to the max no matter what and for good measure bring the papers after close of business on a holiday weekend.
I can understand though how many would feel that this is just too soon, but I can also understand how some feared that there would be too much political pressure towards maximum harshness.
If you drive drunk but don’t kill anyone, should you be charged with manslaughter?
ETA: not defending Manning or Obama, but I want to know if there’s truth to the idea that she definitely got Americans killed, something I’m reading a lot in the twitter-sphere.
Now the interesting question is whether Assange will honor his Tweeted promise to allow extradition to the US.
Well, wikileaks and Russian hackers are the heros of the Trump revolution, so if there was ever a good time to be extradited to the US, it would be on Trump’s watch. He might give him a medal.
Well, the US isn’t currently seeking Assange’s arrest, so his tweet is like me saying that I will pay off my entire debt to Trump if he decides not to serve as President. (I owe him nothing - sad!)
Had Assange agreed to be extradited to Sweden, that would have been notable.
Reported on the PBS News Hour tonight: There is no confirmation anyone was killed because of his leaks, but some agents did have to be moved to take them out of danger.
The U.S. has never issued an arrest warrant for the rapist Assange. Which is why his claim that he refused extradition to Sweden, because the U.S. would extradite him, all the more ludicrous.
This.
How convenient that Obama pardons a traitor when he no longer has to run for anything. Just leave the Democrats to deal with the negative fallout.
Manning’s pardon muddies what had up to now been an unambiguous case that the Republicans put party ahead of nation wrt Russia and Putin. Now it’s much easier to say that both sides do it.
No small degree of narcissism here, and it’s shit like this that contributed to the Democrats’ collapse.
AFAIU, there is no way to tell if there is a pending US arrest warrant for Assange. Indictments (and warrants) can be sealed and not disclosed to the public until the person’s arrest.
Nitpick. It’s a commutation, not a pardon.
The U.S. would have had to request British and/or Swedish authorities to hold Assange for extradition, and tell them why he was wanted. Assange would then have been able to challenge the extradition in court. Neither the Brits, or the Swedes, have handled such a request.
I disagree with this wholeheartedly. That traitor deserved to spend more time in prison. Why would he do this?
Not yet, they didn’t. But if there is a pending sealed indictment, such a request can be submitted at a moment’s notice.
Thru diplomatic channels? And then challenged in the courts. Shouldn’t take more than a few weeks. Assange could be back in Australia by that time.
Other than the claims by Assange, and his supporters, are there any reputable sources claiming there are pending sealed indictments? Or even pending indictments?