391–400 of 797 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And admit you're the cause of the Assange investigation which has kept him locked up in an embassy for years as well.
Seriously. This is such terrible backroom political manipulation. The real thing that worries me is what exactly are we using to leverage sweden to go after assange this hard. What damage has obama done to our relationship with them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Collusion with the media and a debate moderator should chill anyone. Add to that the fact that the DNC basically anointed her by not giving Sanders a fair shake... democrats were told who to vote for using the media to give them the illusion of free choice. Put another way, the emails revealed that it's very possibly that Trump will be President because Clinton had corrupted the DNC.
> Collusion with the media and a debate moderator should chill anyone. That is really the only significant dirt that came from that leak. The Sanders stuff was overblown.
From what I've read, it appears the DNC directly violated their own bylaws by (strongly) preferring one candidate before the primary. Repeatedly and flagrantly.
If the DNC isn't even accountable to itself, how should American voters feel about them having control over the duopoly of private parties which are allowed to select presidential candidates? At best, their actions were revealed to be grossly unethical. At worst, criminal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can spin any type of classified material as "corruption" and "wrongdoing". Who draws the line? What if someone indiscriminately leaked everything on the Manhattan project during WW2? Would they be a hero because they "acted on their conscience" and showed the world that the big bad USA was secretly developing WMDs? Or would they be a villain because they just taught other countries how to do the same? To the peac…
Do you really believe that the government should be able to do whatever it wants in any area with no transparency or oversight? That's what you're saying — that nobody should be allowed to disclose something that government officials don't want them to, without any further consideration — but I have trouble believing that's what you mean to say.
No thats not what's being said. I would hope we could all be above strawmen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but Ms. Manning's gender is neither indeterminate nor unknown. Ms. Manning is a woman, and she has publicly stated that her pronouns are she/her. This is not difficult information to find.
Guess what? Ms. Manning doesn't get to dictate how the English language works. "They" works just as well for her as it does for me or you. If Chelsea doesn't like it, well, she can take it up with the dictionary. A person can express a preference but their choice (oops, I used "they" again! be sure to downvote!) has no bearing on my choice of words.
On her behalf, let's call up Merriam-Webster.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/singular-nonbi...
The only correct use of the singular-they is as "a pronoun of choice for someone who doesn’t identify as either male or female." You could use singular-they for "a person whose gender isn’t known or isn’t important in the context," but strictly speaking that would be grammatically incorrect.
If - as you claim - you're eager to abide by prescriptive conventions of the English language, feel free to start using "she" when referring to Chelsea Manning.
Why with over 900 points and 339 comments is this item falling to #9 already? Mods?
Little late…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that not worrying though: a journalist writing an article, whilst ignoring a reputable source? No it isn't because that's not what happened. As to the page, the page about the incident. I'm starting to think you don't really know much about the details and want to debate this from first principles. That's not going to be very fruitful.
As to the page, the page about the incident. For my benefit, and the benefit of everyone reading this thread, hoping to gain a greater understanding of the issues, could you please provide the specific URL, rather than alluding elliptically to "the incident" ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He really does. Regardless of whether you like his politics or not he really seems like a genuine, down to Earth person. He always seems professional and articulate. I will miss that aspect of a president.
> He always seems professional and articulate. Yes, especially in comparison to you-know-who got elected... what a massive contrast.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Obama doesn't seem to completely disagree, since he didn't pardon her. He instead commuted the sentence from 35 years to 7 years' imprisonment. In my personal opinion that's still too long for the crime, but it's at least less completely insane than 35 years.
also being tortured in custody and put into solitary is much for the crime. I don't understand why Obama had to wait so long (couldn't he have, at least done it two or three months ago?) and why he's letting Chelsea stay in the pen till summer? Why not let her out more or less now?