Skip to main content

View Diary: Bradley Manning - In His Own Words (104 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Careful... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ask

    ...I think he said he's related to Nancy Grace (or is related to a bunch of lawyers), so he knows why Manning's prosecutors aren't charging him with Treason.

    I mean, since Manning confessed to releasing the cables to WikiLeaks -- and hasn't implicated anyone else in his actions -- and we know precisely what was leaked and how helpful it was to 'The Enemy' (not very -- unless 'embarrassing' is the same thing as 'aid and comfort' -- according to Obama's first Sec. of Defense), there's NO WAY prosecutors could ever prove something like Treason because, you know, they know EVERYTHING he has done because he told them he did it during his Kangaroo Kourt appearance.

    Jesus Christ -- it's not bad enough that the government is charging him at all (and engaging in an all-out, unprecedented WAR on Whistleblowers) -- some here seem to be UPSET that he isn't looking at charges that could result in the death penalty.

    •  I'm a she (0+ / 0-)

      and it certainly doesn't surprise me you would make a stupid assumption.  According to you, prosecutions NEVER overcharge.  Must be why so many murderers are charged with 1st, 2nd degree as well as manslaughter.

      He broke the law  - he admitted it and belongs in prison.  Period.  Now feel free to continue with the kindergarden playground part of your program with lame and pathetic insults and taunts.  

      •  Your gender on an anonymous blog... (0+ / 0-)

        ...is incidental to this debate -- not to mention impossible to determine.  Deferring to the masculine isn't an assumption, it's a common default, sexist as that general rule may be.

        2nd, you're the one speculating (based on your legal acumen as someone related to a host of lawyers) as to the reason Manning's prosecutors haven't charged him with Treason -- not me.  In this instance I happen to agree with the prosecutors:  Manning did not commit an act of treason.

        And C,  I don't need a lecture regarding Kindergarten critical reasoning ('He broke the law...Period') and pathetic insults and taunts from a potty-mouthed person who tells people to 'stuff it'.

        Carry on.

        •  Sorry, I had no idea (0+ / 0-)

          I was conversing with a child who can't handle adult words.  I'll try and remember to only use PG-13 language around such a delicate flower.

          •  No apology for the vulgar language... (0+ / 0-)

            ...is necessary.  Just pointing out that you by no means have staked out the adult portion of this debate:

            Now feel free to continue with the kindergarden [sic] playground part of your program with lame and pathetic insults and taunts.  
            I might be many things, but a shrinking violet ain't one of them.  You may curse and tell people with whom you disagree to 'stuff it' to your little heart's content.  You simply can't pretend to be the grown up when doing so.  That's all.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site