Slashdot Mirror
Chelsea Manning Files to Run for U.S. Senate in Maryland (washingtonpost.com)
An anonymous reader quotes the Washington Post:
Chelsea E. Manning, the transgender former Army private who was convicted of passing sensitive government documents to WikiLeaks, is seeking to run for the U.S. Senate in Maryland, according to federal election filings. Manning would be challenging Democrat Benjamin L. Cardin, who is in his second term in the Senate and is up for reelection in November. Cardin is Maryland's senior senator and is considered an overwhelming favorite to win a third term... However, a candidate with national name recognition, such as Manning, who comes in from the outside could tap a network of donors interested in elevating a progressive agenda...
Evan Greer, campaign director of the nonprofit organization Fight for the Future and a close supporter of Manning's while she was imprisoned, said the news is exciting. "Chelsea Manning has fought for freedom and sacrificed for it in ways that few others have," Greer wrote in an email. "The world is a better place with her as a free woman, and this latest news makes it clear she is only beginning to make her mark on it."
Evan Greer, campaign director of the nonprofit organization Fight for the Future and a close supporter of Manning's while she was imprisoned, said the news is exciting. "Chelsea Manning has fought for freedom and sacrificed for it in ways that few others have," Greer wrote in an email. "The world is a better place with her as a free woman, and this latest news makes it clear she is only beginning to make her mark on it."
I'm 100% certain Manning's heart is in the right place. But she's impulsive in a dangerous way, politically inexperienced, and has proven herself a bad judge of character in terms of who she allies herself with. I just don't see any good coming out of this.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
you have had CES running all week, and yet you shitpost from CNN, why is this news for nerds? People file to run for public office all the time.
Fuck you Chinese Slashdot
So, you prefer your politicians to be criminals who haven't been caught yet... gotcha.
There are some basic rules for running for the Senate, but criminal offenses are covered by state laws. In this case Maryland has chosen to allow felons to represent them. I have no idea how we have gotten to this point but I sure wish we could do take backs...
No, the US does not have laws against convicted criminals from being elected to public office, and it absolutely shouldn't have those laws. The fitness of someone to serve is ultimately determined by the public.
If you block people from being elected (or people from voting) who have committed crimes, you allow unjust laws to ferment unchallenged, and you encourage politicians to pass laws that disproportionately affect their opponents.
Yes, in some cases, that means a murderer or a rapist might be elected. But that's unlikely, I don't see the public supporting the election of a convicted murderer any time soon.
As for Manning? She did what did for the reasons we know. In my view, I'm less bothered about the notion that she violated the law by leaking secret information as I am that she did so impulsively and without care about who she handed that information over to. She's probably a good person, but her lack of care, not the fact she technically violated the law, is a greater concern here.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
It wouldn't be, but thankfully Trump beat Hillary.
When Bradley (active duty) released the stuff to wikileaks he did it in mass. He did not discriminate well on what he released. The video of killing the people, and then killing of the people coming to rescue the injured, is one thing. I wouldn't have ever done it, but I get what he was going for. Releasing tons of unrelated stuff that can hurt our objectives and server members is unforgivable. Now that Chelsea is released from prison she is using her trans status as a vehicle to jump on the progressive train for her own benefit. I heard that while in the Army he was a terrible private, and that gives me no confidence in him that could help recover his betrayal of the country he wants to represent. I say no, never. And it has nothing to do with her transition. (Gender applied chronologically)
Manning is the 4th Democrat to file for this office so far. The primary in May will weed out which one will end up in the general election, and it probably won't be her. Given the office is held by a well-respected two time Democratic senator, she probably doesn't have the traction to replace him, even with major name recognition.
If her ultimate goal is book sales for her life story, running for office is a great way to keep her name in the news. Otherwise, being released, she's yesterday's news.
If you block people from being elected (or people from voting) who have committed crimes, you allow unjust laws to ferment unchallenged, and you encourage politicians to pass laws that disproportionately affect their opponents.
Very true. Unfortunately, the US has not taken the full steps needed to avoid this, due to disenfranchisement of felons. In a two-party system, this invites those in charge to make and enact laws that hit the other side harder than theirs.
Most democracies have safeguards to prevent this, most notably by making voting an inalienable right. You then can't silence opponents by creating unfair laws, and then take away people's right to vote when they break them.
What matters to people, apparently, are legal technicalities rather than character. If a con-man can rewrite the laws so that his con isn't illegal, that's good enough for them.
In a nutshell, there are a lot of people who are content to be ruled.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
That's a wise rule of Maryland, because it is a standard tactic of fascist regimes and dictators to make sure that political opponents get convicted as felons. It's a good safeguard, take a look at Russia to see what happens if you don't have it.
I see you're keeping the streak alive. I have yet to see a person who casts judgment on Manning give one flying fuck about the massive corruption and war crimes she revealed, or want the people who committed those crimes to pay for their actions.
Uh, NO. She tried the "chain of command" and was blown off, just as Snowden was. And she gave documents to a responsible organization, one with a 100% track record of authenticity, who vetted them before release. Do tell how she was going to uphold her Oath of Office to defend the Constitution (not neocon war criminals) without leaking to the press.
She has a whole lot of experience with the lawless authoritarian state and the torture the USG commits against people in detention (prolonged solitary confinement). Getting one advocate against those things into higher office is hardly unreasonable.
She wasn't allied with the FBI stooge Lamo. You referring to Assange here? The same Julian Assange who has a 100% track record of authentic releases, and has been subject to more authoritarian character assassination?
That's a cute defence.
"For 250 counts of first degree murder, you are hereby sentenced to death."
"Actually, I'm a woman now."
"Oh, well in that case you're free to go!"
It wouldn't be, but thankfully Trump beat Hillary.
When the GP said "senile imbecility" I thought Reagan, not Clinton (or Trump.)
That being said, I tip my hat to both Reagan and Gorbachev for shaking hands and ending the cold war.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
He became the swamp; it a Zen thing.
That kind of defence is as lame as changing your name and then claiming the suspect no longer exists.
Don't get me wrong, changing your gender is certainly more onerous a choice than changing your name, but come on, you are still you.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.