Slashdot Mirror


President Obama Commutes Chelsea Manning's Sentence (theverge.com)

The New York Times is reporting that President Obama has commuted Chelsea Manning's sentence. What this translates to is a reduced sentence for Manning, from 35 years to just over seven years. Since Manning has already served a majority of those years, she is due to be released from federal custody on May 17th. The Verge reports: While serving as an intelligence analyst in Iraq, Manning leaked more than 700,000 documents to Wikileaks, including video of a 2007 airstrike in Baghdad that killed two Reuters employees. In 2013, Manning was sentenced to 35 years in prison for her role in the leak and has been held at the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth for the past three years. Julian Assange, who has long been sought by U.S. and EU authorities for extradition on Swedish rape charges, had previously pledged to surrender himself to U.S. authorities if Manning was pardoned. Born Bradley Manning, Chelsea announced her gender transition the day after the verdict was handed down. "I am Chelsea Manning. I am a female," she said in a statement. "Given the way that I feel, and have felt since childhood, I want to begin hormone therapy as soon as possible." Obtaining the resulting medical treatments was extremely difficult for Manning, and was the subject of significant and sustained activism. After a lawsuit, Manning was approved for hormone therapy in 2015. In September 2016, she launched a hunger strike, demanding access to gender reassignment surgery; the military complied five days later.

42 of 798 comments (clear)

  1. Not sure what to think.... by beheaderaswp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not sure how I feel about this. If it was my estimation that the two political parties were more interested in what is best for America, rather than just winning their ideological war, this would hold more weight for me.

    Snowdon seems the logical "other pardon". Not sure I'd like that to happen. Would prefer a trial where he would be allowed to make his case. Manning wasn't afforded that opportunity either.

    Neither case is at the instigation of a foreign government. So the issues need to be gone through in an open court so the country can understand the issues. And legally decide whether a crime was committed, or these were justified acts done by patriots.

    --
    Another consultant who stuck it out.

    "We are the Priests, of the Temples of Syrinx..."
    1. Re:Not sure what to think.... by DickBreath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Snowden should also be pardoned.

      As for being able to make their case so the country can understand the issues, I suppose they could appear on talk shows. Write a book. Which then becomes a movie, er . . . oh, wait.

      Even better would be if there had been legitimate channels where whistle blowers could have reported problems without fear of reprisals.

      A pardon may not completely say that their acts were justified, but it at least gets them out of trouble.

      The problem with a court proceeding is that it puts them back in jeopardy of whatever way the winds may blow in court.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    2. Re:Not sure what to think.... by quantaman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not sure how I feel about this. If it was my estimation that the two political parties were more interested in what is best for America, rather than just winning their ideological war, this would hold more weight for me.

      Snowdon seems the logical "other pardon". Not sure I'd like that to happen. Would prefer a trial where he would be allowed to make his case. Manning wasn't afforded that opportunity either.

      Neither case is at the instigation of a foreign government. So the issues need to be gone through in an open court so the country can understand the issues. And legally decide whether a crime was committed, or these were justified acts done by patriots.

      I wouldn't be shocked if Trump pardoned Snowden, it would make Russia look good by justifying their harbouring of Snowden and it's just the sort of PR splash/distraction that Trump loves.

      Not sure about Assange though, Trump's lovefest with Wikileaks will come to a very quick end if they ever dump something that he wants hidden. In fact, aiding the election of someone who's campaigned on the vilification of the press may be one of the more short-sighted things that Assange has done.

      --
      I stole this Sig
    3. Re:Not sure what to think.... by DickBreath · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I believe Ford pre-emptively pardoned Nixon before any charges were filed.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    4. Re:Not sure what to think.... by JustNiz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Sure it is. What Snowden did was altruistic and for the good of the people. What Nixon did was abuses of power designed to line his own pockets.

    5. Re:Not sure what to think.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So fucking what? If someone wants to live as a woman, why is that a problem to you?

      Frankly anyone who cares is an asshole

    6. Re:Not sure what to think.... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1, Insightful

      There are people whose chromosomes are of one gender but whose external genitalia are of another, as a matter of fetal development. Sexuality is more than genitals and chromosomes, even without the involvement of surgery.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    7. Re:Not sure what to think.... by Stephan+Schulz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      IWould prefer a trial where he would be allowed to make his case. Manning wasn't afforded that opportunity either.

      Huh? Manning was convicted - hence there was a trial. What use would another trial be?

      Well for one it would be a trial against Snowden, not against Manning. And the request was for "a trial where [the defendant] would be allowed to make his case", not a secret trial by a Mickey Mouse court with a pre-determined outcome.

      --

      Stephan

    8. Re:Not sure what to think.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      The personal pronoun refers to her gender, not her sex.

      Yet transfolks tend to pump themselves up with hormones in an attempt to gain secondary sexual characteristics.

      If it was merely gender, there would be no need for that.

    9. Re:Not sure what to think.... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Does any of it matter? She wants to be referred to as "she", so unless you have some particular reason to be a asshat towards her why not just do it?

      Some posters keep complaining about the lack of respect people have these days, while refusing to show the most basic level towards transgender people.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:Not sure what to think.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Are you living in the same culture as me? Cause this culture is INTENSELY committed to linking gender to sex, so much so that in order to just exist in the world doing regular things on a day-to-day basis, you really do have to go all the way down to the biological core for people to "believe" you. Maybe if our culture wasn't so hell bent on linking what colors you should like and what toys you should play with and what clothes you should wear to whether you have a thing sticking out of your crotch, then I might see your point...

    11. Re:Not sure what to think.... by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And yet here we are explaining the basics of gender to you, so I guess some of us still have sympathy for the weakminded.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    12. Re:Not sure what to think.... by Stephan+Schulz · · Score: 4, Insightful

      manning is a traitor. HE will always be viewed as such.

      Snowden too.

      By stupid rednecks, sure. The type of people who think (ok, that's a legal fiction) that they are right not because of their actions, but by default. The type who "thinks" that there is a finite supply of bad people in the world, and that we can solve all our problems by killing or incarcerating them, never mind the collateral damage. The type who may have heard of human rights, but does not understand that they apply to all humans, even those that disagree with them.

      I'm not a big fan of Assange, but he wrote an excellent statement on the Manning case, quoting John Adams: "“Liberty cannot be preserved without a general knowledge among the people, who have a right and a desire to know.” He does not quote the second part, but I find it just as applicable: "...but besides this, they have a right, an indisputable, unalienable, indefeasible, divine right to that most dreaded and envied kind of knowledge, I mean of the characters and conduct of their rulers."

      If you look at how Manning was treated both pre- and post-trial, its "as incontrovertible as geometry to any enlightened community of minds" that the people responsible for that treatment are guilty of severe crimes under both national and international laws - regardless of what Manning had done. But, as the presidential election has shown, "this community is an insult to the world" (to steal from Henry Drummond/Spencer Tracy), and so the chance for actual justice is remote.

      --

      Stephan

    13. Re:Not sure what to think.... by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 2, Insightful

      One, Compelling a person to say things is kind of tyrannical, isn't it? We have completely disintegrated as a society by placing the "feelings" of everyone above everyone else's feelings. Sorry cupcake, but YOUR feelings do not trump (no pun intended) my feelings.

      I have no respect for Manning, because he deserves none. She has got exactly what it wanted out of his surgery, sympathy from a sycophantic cult of "Gender Identity", who view her as some sort of "hero" for having some gender make believe surgery. I don't care if it wants to be called anything, traitor is what he is.

      Snowden and Assange deserve the pardons.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    14. Re:Not sure what to think.... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Huh? Manning was convicted - hence there was a trial. What use would another trial be?

      She pled guilty, so there was no trial. She was not allowed to use the defense that her actions were justified, and in the best interests of her country. That is/was not a permissible defense, and the jury would not have been allowed to hear it. So she had no choice but to plead guilty and go to jail. So much for a "fair trial".

    15. Re:Not sure what to think.... by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What special privilege is Chelsea asking for? She wants to be called by her gender (not biological sex; those are medically and legally different things). She's not asking to go to an all-girls high school or otherwise do anything controversial. In what remote sense does her request harm you in any way?

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    16. Re: Not sure what to think.... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1, Insightful

      They're trying to show how anti-PC they are, and in general, these days, being anti-PC largely seems to be the equivalent of being obnoxious and rude.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    17. Re:Not sure what to think.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why do people keep repeating this zombie talking point? I know y'all didn't flunk out of school before they covered Nixon in civics class.

      Because the legality of the Nixon pardon was never established. Nor did Burdick , upon which Ford justified that pardon, provide actual curial authority that the President's power extends to granting immunity from future prosecution. On the contrary, the court specifically declined so to find:

      "The Solicitor General, in his discussion of the question, following the division of the district court, contends ... that the President has power to pardon an offense before admission or conviction of it ... In our view of the case it is not material to decide whether the pardoning power may be exercised before conviction."

      The better view is that granting immunity from prosecution is overreach, that Ford acted unlawfully, and that pardoning Snowden would similarly be beyond the President's powers. At the very least, Obama's exercise this power under these circumstances would be open to a serious challenge (which might at least provide some legal clarity).

    18. Re:Not sure what to think.... by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So decorum and manners are of no value at all to you? You basically feel entitled to be as rude and awful as you please? Well go for it. Yes, the government won't haul your ass into court for being an asshole, but I think you'll find your life will be worse for it. Because of course even someone like you knows there are social rules.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    19. Re:Not sure what to think.... by lgw · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Does any of it matter? She wants to be referred to as "she", so unless you have some particular reason to be a asshat towards her why not just do it?

      When talking to him directly? Sure, it's only polite to call him "her". Heck, I've been to enough cons - if someone wants to be a Klingon ship captain, sure, I'll play along if they're there and in costume. But they still aren't Klingon, and I'm not going to think of them as Klingon, or refer to them that way in normal conversation.

      There's a quote sometimes attributed to Lincoln: "How many legs does a dog have if you call a tail a leg? Four - doesn't matter what you call it, it's not a leg".

      My sympathy towards anyone with a mistake belief about reality that interferes with their daily life - psychoses suck. But I'm not going to participate in their reality.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    20. Re:Not sure what to think.... by j-beda · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The personal pronoun refers to her gender, not her sex.

      People like you need to be put to death.

      Abit extreme I would think. If we killed off everyone who had a differing opinion of how to address others, we might not have such a large population load on the planet, so I suppose there would be an upside.

    21. Re:Not sure what to think.... by j-beda · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Felons by default do not have full rights as citizens, including RKBA and Voting. That is what happens when you commit a felony. Sucks to be a felon, so don't commit felonies.

      It depends on the state: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      If we are interested in curtailing re-offense and encouraging re-integration after prison, I don't think that disenfranchisement is particularly productive. There is considerable doubt over deterrent effect of the death penalty - I suspect that the deterrenc effect of disenfranchisement is pretty small.

    22. Re:Not sure what to think.... by hawk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Read 1984 . . .

    23. Re:Not sure what to think.... by plague911 · · Score: 1, Insightful
      " She wants to be called by her gender (not biological sex; those are medically and legally different things)" They are not medically or legally different things. I couldn't care less if people with dicks want to go into the girls bathroom or people with vaginas want to do something that people with dicks normally do. Does not matter to me at all. But what you and other extreme liberals (hit I am mostly a liberal) are trying to do is rewrite the history of our language.

      Now it is perfectly fine for language to change, however, you do that naturally by words slowly evolving over time. What here has happened is the extreme leftist decided to redefine gender and sex for the rest of the nation and pretend it was always that way without consulting the rest of us. To use a similar term that the left has been tossing around about Trump. That is "gas lighting." To that I say go screw off

    24. Re: Not sure what to think.... by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And what will Putin do?

      If history tells us anything, it's that Putin rarely keeps his pets after using them.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    25. Re:Not sure what to think.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's no known relationship between transgenderism, and delusions or psychoses. People with delusions tend to have a history of psychological problems and a spread of issues. Trans-folks, once you get over any bumps caused by repression or rejection, don't really have any of that. They have a straight-line, sometimes very strongly felt dysphoria. Calling it a delusion is to ignore all the detail of the phenomenon, which make you a bad nerd!

      It's perfectly plausible that hormonal variations during development could cause this stuff - gendered body parts are month 2+, brain is month 6. If your testosterone levels fall off, or your mother is feeding anti-androgens in, etc, then you'll get male body, female brain.

      It surprises me that people find this hard to get, when such hormonal variations cause plenty of other conditions. And it's not like "I think I'm female" is an unusual feeling - it's common to over half the world's population, and in the absence of foetal androgens, everyone would say it.

    26. Re:Not sure what to think.... by Bite+The+Pillow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      One, Compelling a person to say things is kind of tyrannical, isn't it? We have completely disintegrated as a society by placing the "feelings" of everyone above everyone else's feelings. Sorry cupcake, but YOUR feelings do not trump (no pun intended) my feelings.

      I feel like you're kind of a sanctimonious shitbag. I could go on, but I feel like I've made my point.

      Imagine being in real life when someone like you says stupid things, and then everyone decides to agree with you and label you the sanctimonious shitbag for the rest of your life. Table for one for sanctimonious shitbag. Now attending, sanctimonious shitbag. May I please speak with raging ignorant asshole? Oh sorry, I apparently reached sanctimonious shitbag by mistake.

      Sure it doesn't hurt your feelings now, internet tough guy, but you consider how this really shakes out if we go with the way you want, which is really just for *you* to be able to say anything you want.

    27. Re:Not sure what to think.... by dcw3 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Article II, Section 2 of the United States Constitution which states that the President "shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment." The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted this language to include the power to grant pardons, conditional pardons, commutations of sentence, conditional commutations of sentence, remissions of fines and forfeitures, respites, and amnesties.

      I think that pretty much covers it.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
  2. Re:Your move, Assange.... by KiloByte · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Manning wasn't pardoned, his sentence merely got reduced. Assange's offer was for a pardon.

    --
    The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
  3. Re:Treason ain't what it used to be by DickBreath · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Whistle blowing should not be considered treason. After seeing how other whistleblowers were treated, by the Obama administration, I can see why Snowden chose the actions he took. He was willing to give up his comfortable life to alert us all to a gigantic problem. One which has generated a huge amount of public debate. And has led to some actual reforms.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  4. For everyone who ragged on Obama by rsilvergun · · Score: 1, Insightful

    For not being progressive, well, here you go. And thanks so much for staying home last November. Please, for God's sake show up for the mid terms.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  5. Re:Ben Carson was right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    And let taxpayers foot the bill for gender reassignment. How many millions of $ did this cost? Does that now mean that anyone in Obamacare can get it free of charge?

  6. Uh, because he's not? by Uberbah · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Obama is a hard core neoliberal neocon freakshow. This is the guy that bombed more countries than Bush, make the Patriot Act look like the Magna Carta by repealing Habeas Corpus with an NDAA, and started a war in Libya without Congressional authorization. Which his own VP said he would have supported Bush's impeachment if he had done the same thing with Iran.

    For not being progressive, well, here you go.

    You mean after he tortured Manning for a year with solitary confinement, and committed unlawful command influence by declaring Manning guilty before a conviction - and promoted the judge during the trial. But now, after seven years in prison, with consistent humiliation (and a little torture mixed in) is he not merciful?

  7. Bigoted transophobes. by Uberbah · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Still, you might get a few years left where your prejudice may be voiced in polite company, as trans rights are 20-30 years behind gay rights in this country.

  8. Re:Ben Carson was right by Pascoea · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As long as they go to prison, sure, they can get a gender reassignment.

    And I think you're off by a hair on your "millions" estimate. Male to female ranges from $7-$24,000. (source)

    For reference, a new knee will cost about $50k. Technically a knee replacement is an elective surgery. How many of those were done to inmates last year? Should they be denied therapy as well? Or does gender reassignment bother you because it doesn't match your world view?

  9. Re:Woohoo! by Uberbah · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Still waiting on SensitiveAuthortarian to see why Manning's release is more upsetting than the fact that government contractors were engaged in child trafficking in Afghanistan - as revealed by Wikileaks. It's only SA's tax dollars that were hard at work, supporting boy fucking abroad...

  10. Re:Woohoo! by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Can you point to an American who was killed due to the leak? No? Then STFU.

  11. This was a reasonable thing to do by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The sentence was a bit harsh, and some of the methods used during interrogation and imprisonment, meant that a reduced sentence was reasonable.

    Assange and Snowden need to make a deal now. Trump works for Russia, but he will hang them out to dry anyway, that's the kind of quisling he is.

    Better the devil you know than the insane devil you don't know.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  12. Re:Best fucking part by MightyMartian · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Assange's largest immediate problem are that British authorities will grab him if ever tries to leave the Embassy in anything other than a coffin, and then he will doubtless spend some time in a British prison for evading arrest and defying a British court, before being trundled off to Sweden. Now maybe there's some secret deal between Sweden and the United States, but Assange has never actually provided such evidence, despite being a guy who prides himself on knowing all the secrets. From what I can see, the whole point of the conspiracy theory is that Assange needs to preserve his cult of personality by trying to bury his own alleged misconduct in Sweden with grand tales of conspiracy.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  13. Re:Best fucking part by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1, Insightful

    No. The "funny" part will be if he surrenders to the Brits, who hand him over to the USG rather than Sweden. Thus proving the rape allegations were a farce, a mere pretext to get him arrested and extradited to the United States.

    Maybe you missed it the first time: there is no US extradition request for Julian Assange.

    Your Assange fanfic could be a little more believable. Keep working on it.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  14. Re:Varied opinions by Sabriel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Regardless of what they did or didn't do, what message does it send to the rest of the military that those imprisoned by the US are tortured with official sanction even up to and including the POTUS?

    "Because our enemies are worse" is not a position of respect.

  15. Re:Varied opinions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think the important distinction is that military folk swear to uphold and protect the Constitution first. Next, they are to obey lawful orders of the President and their superiors.

    Copy and pasted from "A Duty to Disobey All Unlawful Orders:"
    "During the Iran-Contra hearings of 1987, Senator Daniel Inouye of Hawaii, a decorated World War II veteran and hero, told Lt. Col. Oliver North that North was breaking his oath when he blindly followed the commands of Ronald Reagan. As Inouye stated, "The uniform code makes it abundantly clear that it must be the Lawful orders of a superior officer. In fact it says, 'Members of the military have an obligation to disobey unlawful orders.' This principle was considered so important that we--we, the government of the United States--proposed that it be internationally applied in the Nuremberg trials." (Bill Moyers, "The Secret Government")"

    Right or wrong, Manning felt like she had a duty to bring attention to what she felt was unlawful conduct by the military. I believe she did the right thing. I would hope that if / when things truly go south in this country, the military will be on the People's side in taking the government back.