Chelsea Manning Turned Down Lesser Sentence To Not Sell Out Julian Assange

[kpete]

Last edited Fri Aug 23, 2013, 08:04 PM - Edit history (1)

Just don't know how to confirm this source, so take it easy with this info (& let me know what you hear):

“Part of that would be to cooperate in testifying, so obviously we didn’t do that,” said Coombs at a press conference. “If the Department of Justice got their way, they would get a plea deal in this case, and my client would be named as one of the witnesses to go after Julian Assange,”

http://www.carbonated.tv/news/bradley-manning-turned-down-lesser-sentence-to-not-sell-out-julian-assange

[scooter rider]

1. RT TV reporting the same

Manning’s lead defense attorney, David Coombs, announced during a press conference that an offer was previously on the table.

“Part of that would be to cooperate in testifying, so obviously we didn’t do that,” he said.

He refused to elaborate any further, citing a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) with government prosecutors.

http://rt.com/usa/manning-plead-guilty-lesser-sentence-817/

[quinnox]

2. Good for him, Bradley Manning should be

released from prison hopefully way sooner than his outrageous sentence.

[East Coast Pirate]

26. Chelsea Manning.

[msanthrope]

3. The deal with Justice is still extant. And if Manning wants Butner, then she will seriously

consider it.

[DevonRex]

10. Butner sure as hell beats the alternative. Has Chelsea

read the latest Assange news, I wonder.

[msanthrope]

12. I have no idea what media she is allowed, but I sure hope that she reconsiders

her options once maximum security sets in.

[sabrina 1]

4. She wasn't willing to lie. It's not surprising as Manning appears to be a person of high principles.

We all knew they were trying to get information, false or not, that would help them indict Assange as a 'terrorist' or 'enemy' of the US. That is why Manning was subjected to such harsh treatment.

But we have Manning's own words BEFORE she was indicted addressing whether or not Assange had anything, other than being a recipient of the documents, with Manning obtaining them or being influenced by them.

It took great courage not to allow them to force her to lie.

[emsimon33]

5. My prayer is that Manning gets a pardon

and is recognized as a hero. I doubt that Obama will provide the pardon, but perhaps we will get a president next time who believes in the rule of law and protects whistle blowers and pardons Manning.

[cstanleytech]

58. Ummm, you do know that there actually is a law in place to protect whistleblowers

and that it allows them (if I recall correctly) to report something they believe is a crime to a member of congress and or to the inspector generals office?
As for a pardon I agree Obama wont do it though he might go for a commutation though it will probably be on his last day in office if that happens.

[JoeyT]

75. Yes, and there's a long list of people that

did it the "right" way and nothing got done other than punishing people that didn't know how to keep their mouth shut.

The reason they made the "right" way to blow the whistle in the first place is so they can cover it up.

[cstanleytech]

83. Thats one way to look at it the other way to look at it is as a law

that put into place so that a whistleblower doesnt do something negligent like releasing thousands of documents without making sure no names or ways to identify the sources are included.

[Cronus Protagonist]

70. She would be the most prominent Transhero in these times

A Legendary comic book story becomes reality!

[phleshdef]

6. Assange used Manning and allowed Manning to take all of the fall for it. I wish Manning would

...realize that. That fucking narcissistic, rapist pig would deserve it.

[MADem]

7. +1

Manning only went to trial because the death penalty was on the table in relation to one charge (acquitted). The defense entered a bunch of guilty pleas on most of the other charges.

[struggle4progress]

33. The death penalty actually wasn't ever on the table. The offense can only be prosecuted

as a capital offense if the charges are initially brought to the court-martial as capital charges. But in this case, they were not brought as capital charges, so Manning never faced possible execution

[MADem]

34. Well, I didn't follow the details closely, but newspapers reported otherwise...

There was a three month period, there, when the DP was "on the table," as they say, or at least propped up on the chair beside the table:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/mar/03/bradley-manning-may-face-death-penalty

According to Coombs, the 22 new charges were preferred by Manning's commanding officer after he made his own assessment of possible offences in the case. Under the court martial procedure, a provisional hearing, known as an Article 32, will be held in late May or early June when final charges to be laid against Manning will be decided. At that stage it will be known for certain whether the private faces a possible death sentence in the court martial itself.

Mainstream US TV news--

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/41876046/ns/us_news-security/t/manning-faces-new-charges-possible-death-penalty/

His advocacy site said as much as well--

http://www.bradleymanning.org/news/bradley-manning-facing-possible-death-penalty-under-new-charges

[jeff47]

9. +1

[Tarheel_Dem]

11. +1000

[msanthrope]

13. Yep. Spot on. nt

[uponit7771]

25. +1

[great white snark]

30. Yes and yes.

[Bobbie Jo]

47. +1

[Aerows]

8. Could this be related to the "insurance file" put up

and distributed by WikiLeaks on Sunday with AES-256 encryption? I figured it was something new. I don't know, now I wonder. And I'm neutral on whether it means anything, just speculation.

[iandhr]

14. If this is true its disappointing

[GoneFishin]

15. This was suspected due to the harsh pretrial treatment.

They were in essence trying to torture Manning into testifying against Assange.

[AverageJoe90]

16. I understand Manning's motivation, but I feel it was a tragically foolish move.

If I was in Chelsea Manning's position, *and* knowing what I know about Assange, I certainly would have, without a second thought.

[mimi85]

37. No one cheers for Assange

more than Assange. I agree, I wouldn't hesitate for a NY Minute. I think he's a narcissistic asshole. Something tells me he'd turn on his grandmother for a dime. And I fully believe all the stories of the sexual harassment.

[Hydra]

17. Manning's whole trial was about Assange and Wikileaks, with a dollop of everyone in the US

More than once during the trial, I felt like they were ignoring Manning sitting in the chair in favor of setting up cases against Assange, Wikileaks and Journalism in general rather than addressing the alleged enemy of the state.

I'm sure they wanted Manning to work with them to set up the first of many terrorism cases against Journalists and their organizations...but that's against everything she was trying to accomplish in leaking these documents.

No wonder she could say that "It's going to be ok." Knowing you are doing the right thing allows you to endure almost anything.

[MADem]

35. Gee, and I thought it was about an individual with a TS/SCI completely

abrogating a sworn oath, duties and responsibilities because of personal issues, a sense of alienation and not belonging, and anger.

Manning's statement said "I know I hurt the United States." There was also an apology in there, somewhere.

Hard to know what's going on with all this, what is truth, what is speculation, and what people want to read into this situation.

We'll just have to wait for the book, I guess.

I think Manning did a wrong thing; I sympathize with the mental health issues and the trauma, but I do think the piper must be paid. I hope she makes good use of her time while incarcerated, and takes some time to self-improve.

[Hydra]

39. Wow, you hit all the talking points

Bushco thanks you for your support.

Manning's only mistake was in the doubt she felt about what she was doing.

No one died because of what she released. Statistically that's impossible based on the volume of what was released for that to be anything other than proof that it was done correctly and needed to be done.

Fell free to be angry at the person who did the moral thing. The President opted to do the wrong thing, and required this action as it was done. It was done in the highest spirit of defending the Constitution, and I salute it.

[MADem]

40. Now that was nasty of you! The Bushco reference was a particularly shitty touch!

No one died? How do you know? You do know that the USG had to relocate a lot of people as a consequence of what Manning dumped on Assange? You think they'd advertise it if they couldn't get to someone and they ended up rounded up by a hostile government? That's the way to recruit HUMINT operatives--let 'em know that some soldier with personal problems in a SCIF could get them killed!

Again, your making this personal and All About Me says more about you than you realize--none of it good, I must say.

I don't think much your argumentative skills. They are petty, small, mean-spirited. I think I'll just consider the source, and leave it at that.

[Hydra]

49. Lol

Don't be surprised when you can't keep up with current events.

Brigadier general Robert Carr, a senior counter-intelligence officer who headed the Information Review Task Force that investigated the impact of WikiLeaks disclosures on behalf of the Defense Department, told a court at Fort Meade, Maryland, that they had uncovered no specific examples of anyone who had lost his or her life in reprisals that followed the publication of the disclosures on the internet. "I don't have a specific example," he said.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jul/31/bradley-manning-sentencing-hearing-pentagon

The Gov't would have shredded Manning if they had anything. ANYTHING. Instead they huffed, they puffed, and they...had nothing.

In reality, I don't need to argue with you. The facts came out- Chelsea Manning released information mostly about Bushco abuses. President Obama is protecting Bushco. They wanted to put her away for life for giving us proof of the torture and everything we feared was going on. Bushco is not going to jail. Manning is.

If you want to believe something else, feel free- but as I told someone else today: you can have your opinion, but if it's not based on facts it's as valid as the Tea Party or RW Christians who claim they are being "Oppressed."

[cstanleytech]

62. No, they had something which as MADem pointed out

was the violation of the oath thing and before you try the whole spiel over Manning had no choice save it as Manning could have tried reporting it to the inspector general and or to someone in congress as the law allows but Manning did not do that.
Thats not to say I agree with the sentence the court gave because I dont but there isnt anything I can do about that other than to hope for a commutation because I dont think there is any chance of a full pardon because the simple fact is that Manning did do the crime.

[Hydra]

64. Ask Senator Wyden or Sibel Edmonds how well that works. You could ask Pat Tillman, but he's dead.

This is state sanctioned behavior. Bushco is being Protected from war crimes charges. President Obama asked for this retribution against Manning because they wanted to keep it all under wraps.

He will neither grant a pardon, nor will any whistleblower accomplish anything in this Admin, or perhaps in any following this.

The Constitution? It's just a piece of paper.

[cstanleytech]

66. If the topic was Bush I would say put him up to the world court

and let them decide but the topic here is Manning and the oath Manning took and broke.

[Hydra]

68. Nuremberg Principles

Or was that just a big show? Besides, let's examine the oath, shall we?

"I, _____, 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." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).

Where in there is the order to aid in the cover up of war crimes?

[cstanleytech]

81. You just sunk your own argument right there.

" 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.

[Hydra]

89. Nope

Covering up military crimes and lies is not covered by that. UCMJ specifically states the term "Lawful" orders in articles 90 through 92.

What lawful order could have been given for Chelsea to break in this case? The Gov't failed to produce a signed Acceptable Use Policy from Manning. They "lost" or "burned" it. That would have stated Manning was not allowed in the areas she got the information.

Regardless of the why for the sloppy or just plain lax security, Manning found the info, it portrayed crimes, and the Obama Admin is blocking the channels of reporting(because they already know about it and don't want it released), so this is how we had to find out.

I'll put it bluntly- the President is giving illegal orders and covering up illegal actions. The first duty is to the Constitution and to International law. If you believe that the President can overrule that...Nixon Precedent successfully played: "When the President does it, that means it is not illegal."

[stevenleser]

91. You can't use that 'unlawful order' line here. In the military, you are given multiple briefings on

what to do if an order you are given is an unlawful one. You are given multiple options. I've had briefings on what is and what is not an unlawful order and what to do if you are given one, and so had Manning. The military carefully explains these things to you during briefings in basic training and afterwards.

I as a lowly E-4 was given an unlawful order in the military by a brigadier general and a lieutenant colonel. I went to one of my superiors and that superior went to the Inspector General. The result was the general and lieutenant colonel were forced out of the military.

Manning did not follow any of the procedures of what you are supposed to do if you are given an unlawful order. If she had, she would be at home or at the mall right now.

That 'unlawful order' line does not work here.

It's actually impressive that our military and our government has established procedures of how to address unlawful orders. If you step back for a moment you would see that. I doubt you will, however.

[cstanleytech]

93. Read the reply from stevenleser because I just dont have the patience

today to try and deal with you, sorry.

[MADem]

87. Yeah, because "I don't have a specific example" is the

exact same thing as "Never happened."



I hate to say it....so, ya know what? I think I won't.

I prefer the high road, none so blind, etc.

[Hydra]

90. Oh, man, that's funny

A Brigadier General, in charge of investigating Wikileaks can't think of any single person off the top of his head that was killed by this information. Cuz you know, he wouldn't have to have sifted all of that data and had cross reports of people killed and assets disturbed.

Man, for you to be right, you must think he's must be some sort of incompetent.

[MADem]

92. No--it's not "funny" at all. You can't possibly be that obtuse. Or maybe you can be.

"I can't think of a single person" is another way of saying "I can't offer up a single name that isn't classified. If you think I'm going to tip off a country that we admit to having HUMINT operatives at work inside their borders, you're fucking NUTZ. Plausible deniability is the only way to go."

FWIW, a brigadier general makes the coffee that the major general pours and the LT general brings in to the general--they're a dime a dozen at the funny farm.

But hey, be impressed, and be sure of yourself too, if you'd like. I really don't care.

[one_voice]

69. It's their M.O....

criticize any of three Snowden, Manning, or Greenwald, and they throw Bush in your face.

I was talking about Snowden and was accused multiple times of supporting Bush & company war crimes.

Doesn't matter if you think Manning should get a reduced sentence/pardoned, if you don't extend hero status somehow that turns into support for Bush crimes.

You're either with them or....wait a minute....

[MADem]

86. Whoooop--there it is!

[ileus]

18. Well at least he had some respect for others around him.

[mwrguy]

22. SHE n/t

[struggle4progress]

19. It would be nice to find the original source. HuffPo says:

FORT MEADE, Md. -- ... military prosecutors offered his client a plea deal ... that ... involved a longer sentence than the 35 years Manning ultimately received, said defense attorney David Coombs, and "part of that would be to cooperate in testifying, so obviously we didn't do that" ... Coombs did not say explicitly that prosecutors had been seeking testimony against WikiLeaks and its founder, Julian Assange ...
Bradley Manning Was Offered Plea Deal In Exchange For Testimony
Posted: 08/21/2013 7:08 pm EDT | Updated: 08/22/2013 9:27 am EDT
Matt Sledge
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/21/bradley-manning-plea-deal_n_3791647.html

So it looks like Carbonated.TV might have added a fabricated quote to support their spin

[Octafish]

20. Exposed Bush crimes, yet he and his cronies in war profiteering remain free.

You may remember him, the little turd from Crawford who lied America into war?

[mwrguy]

21. HER NAME IS NOT BRADLEY

Her name is Chelsea.

[spinbaby]

24. However

When she made this deal, his name was Bradley.

[MADem]

41. Her name was BRIANNA for awhile, there.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/bradley-manning-defense-reveals-alter-ego-named-brianna-manning/


I think Ms. Manning needs to go through the whole protocol of counseling, evaluation, and treatment for people with gender identity issues, and I don't think she's scratched the surface yet. She may have to wait a while to complete the process, depending on where she is incarcerated.

[Beacool]

84. Isn't his legal name still Bradley?

[MADem]

88. For the time being--Chelsea would be a nickname, an AKA, an alias.

I imagine the lawyers are helping with an application for a name change, if that is the name Manning has settled upon.

[Number23]

23. That is truly heartbreaking.

[East Coast Pirate]

27. How so?

[Number23]

43. That Manning turned down a lesser sentence in order to protect the Human Ego aka Assange

Strange that my comment apparently needed "clarification."

[East Coast Pirate]

44. I can't decide if you're more arrogant or paranoid.

How would I know what your take on this is unless you tell me? Secondly, how do you know that he knows something about Assange that would be useful in a court of law? Or even to smear Assange?

[Number23]

51. And I can't tell if you're obtuse or fishing.

Either way, it's incredibly boring.

[East Coast Pirate]

53. I was leaning toward arrogant.

[Number23]

54. You lean whichever way your little heart desires. Knock yourself out.

[East Coast Pirate]

55. I shall, madam,

and so I shall.

[Number23]

56. Bye, now!

[dionysus]

28. then she was an idiot. nt

[truebluegreen]

52. Or principled.

[LittleBlue]

29. Manning is very brave

When you think about the kind of punishment one would expect to endure for telling the gov to go fuck themselves.

[randome]

45. Or very foolish.

When you think about what Assange said about informants: "They deserve to die."
[hr][font color="blue"][center]There is nothing you can't do if you put your mind to it.
Nothing.[/center][/font][hr]

[LittleBlue]

60. He said what?

Link?

[struggle4progress]

71. ... "Well, they're informants," Assange replied. "So, if they get killed, they've got it coming

to them. They deserve it" ...
The treachery of Julian Assange
The WikiLeaks founder, far from being a champion of freedom, is an active danger to the real seekers of truth
Nick Cohen
The Observer, Saturday 17 September 2011
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/sep/18/julian-assange-wikileaks-nick-cohen

[LittleBlue]

73. Yeah a gov spy is the same as a whistleblower

I knew it was garbage

[struggle4progress]

74. Actually, Assange was discussing Afghan folk working with the US, whose unredacted names

appeared in some of the Manning documents released by Assange

Regardless of the view one wants to take about how much good American intervention actually did folk in Afghanistan, the Taliban do really really suck -- and I'd be ashamed to side with them if I were Assange or if I were you

[LittleBlue]

76. The Taliban are taking over anyway

when we leave. All those spies do is prolong the conflict and delay the inevitable result.

You've got your own shame dealing with transphobia, deal with that before you talk of being ashamed for me.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023523567

[struggle4progress]

77. Well, I regret that some Duers were offended by my poll, as that

was not my intent. Everyone should be free IMO to establish his or her own identity, however they may choose, and that includes members of various sexual minorities. Without difficulty, I'd call Manning Chelsea to her face if the opportunity ever arose, which (however) seems unlikely as I am not a supporter. Coombs' defense strategy was, in part, to persuade the court-martial that Manning had serious problems and needed help which the Army didn't provide, and I consider this an understandable defense strategy though I also think it would be wrong to generalize from it. There are certain ideological dangers to this strategy, including the possibility that it could be read as a claim that persons suffering from gender identity disorder cannot fairly be prosecuted for mishandling classified documents, which would feed rightwing noise that no one suffering from gender identity disorder can be trusted with classified documents. For the same reason, I consider it dangerous to hold up Manning as a poster child for sexual minorities in their fight against bigotry, and I suspect similar reasoning is behind the article Chelsea Manning is no hero for trans soldiers posted earlier today in GD. IIRC the defense strategy has regularly produced accusations of homophobia here at DU, by DUers who thought they should unconditionally support Manning and who were unaware that this was the defense strategy: a recent example was outrage here just last week that the Army released that photo. There are other options in the poll, besides the ones I highlighted above, such as It's not about Manning or I've got other things to think about. Again, I regret offending you or anyone else, as that was not my intent -- but whether they like me or not, I hope that those of you who were offended will consider a bit the dangers associated with unconditional support for Manning and of treating Manning as a poster child of some sort

[struggle4progress]

78. "The Taliban are taking over anyway" is a fairly vacuous retort IMO. You asked

for a link in your #60. I provided you that link in #71. Your reaction in #73 is apparently that of Assange: anti-Taliban Afghan folk are spies who deserve to die -- which I regard as a fairly crude take on human affairs

[KittyWampus]

61. I think you've got Snowden in mind when he was posting on Ars Technica as a Ron Paul fan.

[struggle4progress]

80. The quote is from Assange

See my #71

[burnodo]

31. an honorable woman

nt

[Faryn Balyncd]

32. Values & guts.

[liberal_at_heart]

36. thank you for changing that.

[kpete]

38. learning curve

getting on board

peace to you liberal_at_heart

kp

[joshcryer]

42. Said this all along

[ucrdem]

46. His lawyer has floated this idea before.

Back in May or June the same story was reported in the blogosphere, traceable to a similarly vague remark from Coombs. The problem then as now is that Manning was tried in a US military court, and Assange isn't in the US military, so they wouldn't have any jurisdiction, and because he's not a US citizen he couldn't be charged with treason in a US civil court either. So I think this is mainly baloney. I imagine investigators would like to know more about Manning's arrangements with wikileaks, but not because they're trying to hang Assange.

[joshcryer]

50. Manning could've been compelled to testify in civilian court.

I think she was no doubt interrogated and tortured for just that reason, to get her to say something, anything, about Assange. This is not saying Assange did anything illegal, but that they most likely tried to get Manning to say so. That's how the police work.

[ucrdem]

59. But how would a civil court proceed against Assange?

What could he be charged with, not being a US citizen? He didn't steal the docs; Manning supposedly did. I have my doubts, and I imagine Army investigators did too, but even if Manning had cooperated and they figured out that some or all of the docs published by wikileaks came from another source, as I suspect they did, they still wouldn't have a case against Assange. But they'd know more about who and where the real leaks are.

[joshcryer]

63. Well, say, collusion.

They could've got Manning to say that she gave Assange network access or some crap, and that Assange was the one who copied the files, not her. Had Assange illegal network access his protections as a journalist would've been thrown out the window. Journalists don't hack networks, etc.

I'm not saying that they told her to say that but I think ultimately the idea was planted during the interrogation, as a way out, of sorts (it wouldn't have done anything as the police are liars).

[ucrdem]

67. It's also possible that Coombs isn't protecting Assange at all, but other sources,

while inviting Manning and the rest of the world believe that Manning refused to snitch on principle. This makes sense because it's hard to see how Assange could be charged with an actionable crime in a US court of sufficient magnitude to require extradition. So Coombs' remarks seem deliberately misleading.

[cstanleytech]

82. Oh I agree I dont think Assage has anything to really fear in regards

to being extradited to the US though I am tired of him using that dead old horse as an excuse to avoid going to Sweden with the bogus excuse of being extradited to the US because if we wanted him we could have gotten the UK to do it as they are surely a closer ally than Sweden is you would think.

[Marr]

85. That seems likely to me as well. /nt

[99Forever]

48. It's called having integrity.

There's a bunch of yahoos around here that should take some lessons from her.

[Synthesize]

57. Manning continues to be Assange's patsy...

[Nevernose]

65. That's certainly one way to look at it

Or we could look at it through this lens: that Assange and Manning are part of a sideshow, and that the real story should be the many illegalities and immoralities that they revealed.

Of course, no one's being prosecuted for war crimes, but instead are being prosecuted for telling people about the war crimes.

[Cronus Protagonist]

72. She's a Transhero!

I like it!

:^)

[madinmaryland]

79. Fuck Assange and Manning.

I sick of the worship of fucking wannabe's.