Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence • Hacker News Board

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#291

Post by CoryG89 » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 10:37 PM UTC

uxp wrote: post #239

barneygumble742 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obama has said that the two cases are different in that Manning has gone through the legal system, sentenced, and serving time, whereas Snowden is in a country that doesn't have an extradition treaty with the US and hasn't been tried under the US legal system.

Specifically, one cannot be pardoned or have a sentence commuted of a crime one has not been convicted of. Snowden has not been convicted nor even tried for any crime. It's impossible for Obama to do anything about his situation.

This is not true. The courts found that a president can pardon a supposed crime before charges have even been filed, as well as any time before or after trial/conviction.

This was the case with Ford's pardoning of Nixon, as well as Carter's pardoning of all those who avoided the draft during the Vietnam war.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#292

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 10:37 PM UTC

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #77

djsumdog wrote: post #32

Seven years is still a long time for whistle blowing. I'm glad to see she is still getting released though. It's important to note commuting the sentence is not a pardon. Chelsea will still have this conviction for the rest of her life. I know there is a lot of controversy with Manning compared to Wikileaks et. al. as far as not redacting documents or using a discriminating news source to filter them. Still, I oppose…

yeah, maybe, but I guess I would also say that maybe he did the decent thing when he judged it would no longer bear a political cost to do so - because I bet being a politician means you have to take those political costs into consideration. (certain exceptions do spring to mind)

[deleted]

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#293

Post by hackuser » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 10:38 PM UTC

frio wrote: post #130

hackuser wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The reason is that the Democrats don't have a good "bench." Obama led the Democrats to political disaster; I wonder if any party since WWII has been in as bad a political position. Why would they want his continued leadership after he leaves office?

They have; most notably the Republicans when LBJ crushed them in a landslide ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_ele... ). Or even -- again, the Republicans -- as recently as 2008 when Obama won ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_ele... ), and the Democrats has a supermajority across all three houses and beat McCain by a larger margin than Trump beat Clinton. I won't wad…

> the Democrats has a supermajority across all three houses

In 2008 they did not have a 'supermajority', usually interpreted to mean a veto-proof or filibuster-proof majority, in any house of Congress.

Also, today Republicans control both houses and the Governer's seat in approx. 33% of states.

Finally, the Dems can't win in some states due to gerrymandering and voting laws that prevent even a majority of Democratic votes from winning the election.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#294

Post by nilved » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 10:38 PM UTC

arbitrage wrote: post #184

vinay427 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The singular "they" has been used for centuries and is currently somewhat socially acceptable, especially when the gender of the person in question is unknown or disputed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_neutrality_in_English#P...

The gender of the person in question is not unknown, and doesn't need to be disputed. Chelsea Manning identifies as female.

The person you're replying to said "especially." It is also valid when the gender is known.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#295

Post by adrienne » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 10:38 PM UTC

cm2187 wrote: post #92

djsumdog wrote: post #32

Seven years is still a long time for whistle blowing. I'm glad to see she is still getting released though. It's important to note commuting the sentence is not a pardon. Chelsea will still have this conviction for the rest of her life. I know there is a lot of controversy with Manning compared to Wikileaks et. al. as far as not redacting documents or using a discriminating news source to filter them. Still, I oppose…

Whistle blowing requires the knowledge of wrong doing, and exposing these wrong doings. As far as I am aware that guy leaked the data in bulk without looking at it, and without any knowledge of the US diplomacy, and the leaks didn't expose any major wrongdoing. Only some gory videos, that don't really teach us anything (everyone knows bombs make "collateral damages", the US army even maintains statistics on them). An…

Chelsea Manning is a woman; please do not misgender her by referring to her as "that guy".

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#296

Post by hackinthebochs » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 10:38 PM UTC

kidcoach wrote: post #287

notpc wrote: post #18

Manning indiscriminately leaked tons of diplomatic cables, as part of a personal vendetta against the US Army. It is without contention that the vast majority of the leaked cables revealed nothing that anyone considers wrongdoing. This wasn't the act of a whistle blower. It was the cowardly act of someone who put their own petty fantasies ahead of their solemn duty to protect the information they were entrusted with…

HN is one of the few places left for open political discourse with little partisanship or blundering hostility. Your comment/account suggests that you have no intention of continuing that trend. Down-votes represent a reaction to that, not your particular pov.

This hasn't been true of HN for years.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#297

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 10:40 PM UTC

colechristensen wrote: post #222

mhurron wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classifying material should not be a way for the Government to hide corruption and wrongdoing. Whistle blowing is the only way that prevents that. Chelsea Manning acted on her conscience, which is the best we can expect anyone to do. The governments punishment was to prevent that happening again.

Snowden released a large volume of information to well qualified journalists who very carefully combed through the data to find the things most relevant and important for the American public to know. Information that was legitimately classified and had no whistleblowing value simply wasn't released. Manning released a large volume of information to the public en masse with no regard to it's whistleblowing value. Some…

[deleted]

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#298

Post by RogueIMP » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 10:40 PM UTC

colechristensen wrote: post #222

mhurron wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classifying material should not be a way for the Government to hide corruption and wrongdoing. Whistle blowing is the only way that prevents that. Chelsea Manning acted on her conscience, which is the best we can expect anyone to do. The governments punishment was to prevent that happening again.

Snowden released a large volume of information to well qualified journalists who very carefully combed through the data to find the things most relevant and important for the American public to know. Information that was legitimately classified and had no whistleblowing value simply wasn't released. Manning released a large volume of information to the public en masse with no regard to it's whistleblowing value. Some…

Well spoken, and spot on!

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#299

Post by stefantalpalaru » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 10:40 PM UTC

andrewbinstock wrote: post #105

vorotato wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While he isn't blameless, the ACA helped a lot of people, the economy recovered greatly (admittedly all he had to do was not fuck it up), permitted states to legalize weed. For me I have to say the ACA is probably the biggest reason why I liked him well enough. I was able to stay on my parents insurance until I was 26, and then since I was self-employed I was able to easily get insurance through the marketplace. Now…

And his support for LGBT issues

Well, he assassinated nine bystanders for every human target designated by algorithms and identified by a mobile phone, he assassinated kids having a barbecue in Yemen, he assassinated US citizens after secret trials where they had no representation, he let the CIA conduct military operations and strike without even having a designated human target, he waged a war on whistleblowers, he presided over a fracking boom, he turned the whole planet into East Germany, he presided over the militarisation of police and the ICE prison maze where undocumented immigrants can simply disappear, he wasted two years of Democrat majority in both chambers of Congress on a single law, he tried to accelerate a new Cold War days before the end of his term, but sure, let's focus on LGBT issues.

Re: Obama Commutes Bulk of Chelsea Manning’s Sentence

#300

Post by etjossem » Tue, Jan 17, 2017, 10:41 PM UTC

hackinthebochs wrote: post #251

etjossem wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no idea what was in any of the information being leaked After watching journalists get annihilated by an Apache missile strike, there is not a lot of room for confusion. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0

So because there happened to be something bad among the 250k documents, the act itself is completely absolved? If I were to murder 100 people randomly should I be absolved because it turned out one of them was a child molester?

> If I were to murder 100 people randomly should I be absolved because it turned out one of them was a child molester?

You sound ridiculous. Let's get to the real question.

> So because there happened to be something bad among the 250k documents, the act itself is completely absolved?

In short, yes. Her 7-year sentence has already been quite enough.

I will concede that the outlet through which the leaks were published didn't meet the standards to which we usually hold investigative reporting. Manning chose to disclose all cables in confidence to a team she felt could sift through them for evidence of wrongdoing. That team then proved themselves irresponsible by publishing everything. They should have been far more selective about what they disclosed to the public.

I don't blame the source here. I absolutely do blame the coverage.