Skip to main content

Yesterday, Col. Denise Lind ruled that the military illegally punished alleged WikiLeaks source Pfc. Bradley Manning by holding in excessive and effectively punitive conditions during his 9 months at Quantico.

Manning will receive nearly 4 months of credit against any eventual prison sentence, but this is a Pyrrhic victory compared to the torture he endured--9 months of solitary confinement/isolation, humiliation techniques, sleep deprivation, sensory deprivation and stress positions, which I detail here.

I attended the torture hearing and, for me, what is so striking about this decision is how much it comports will all government investigations of itself:

We messed up, but no one meant to, so no one will be held responsible.
What is also striking is the slick and dangerous way in which a person's mental health history can be selectively used or ignored to justify it all.

Other great points not emphasized in this diary can be found here (Josh Gerstein of Politico) and here (Kevin Gosztola of FireDogLake).

Judge Lind granted Manning 112 days of credit against any eventual prison sentence. While this is the longest sentencing credit ever granted in an Article 13 (unlawful conditions of pretrial confinement) hearing, it is really minuscule compared to the life imprisonment Manning is facing--and what was done to him at Quantico.

This is not to underplay that fact that this decision is a rare glimmer of justice in the human rights community, and an even rarer acknowledgment of torture. Or the fact that it belies President Obama's statement that Manning's treatment was "appropriate"--something that should convince people (if they don't get it already) that when it comes to torture, you can't rely on the government's empty reassurances and "just trust us" mantra.

Judge Lind exhaustively spent nearly two hours reading her decision aloud (something that's necessary because there are no transcripts or published decisions in this court-martial)--the subject of collateral litigation and another diary.

There were a number of things that were included--and omitted--especially with regard to Manning's mental health.  

She spent an inordinate amount of time on Manning's psychological history--far more than was spent in the entire weeks-long hearing--as a way of rationalizing that Quantico officials had a reasonable belief that Manning was a risk of harm to himself. She adopted the Brig's justification for ignoring the recommendation of his treating psychiatrist (Dr. Hocter) that Manning was not a suicide risk. . . namely that the Brig officers didn't trust the doctor and placed their uninformed judgment above his.  But while she detailed Manning's psychological history in excruciating detail, she neglected to mention that 4 other mental health physicians reached the same conclusion (to talk him off solitary) and were also ignored.

She found,

There was no intent to punish the accused by anyone in the Marine Corps brig staff or chain of command
and that everyone's concern was for Manning's health and getting him safely to trial. This defies credulity for anyone who listened to the horrific testimony, in which officers over and over again expressed their frustration that Manning refused to chat with them--kind of hard when you have to ask the same people for toilet paper every time you relieve yourself--which they also watch.

The judge's utilitarian calculus for sentencing credit is based on the fact that continually holding Manning on “suicide risk” or “prevention of injury” status became "excessive" after a certain point.

But the real point is, it was never necessary, and people should pay attention because Manning's Kafkaesque nightmare at Quantico foreshadows what "indefinite preventive detention" under the National Defense Authorization Act will look like.

Originally posted to Jesselyn Radack on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 06:16 AM PST.

Also republished by Occupy Wall Street.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Actually his pre-trial detention treatment just (6+ / 0-)

    highights the state of pre-trial detention in the entire country for years. Luckily Manning has had the vocal support of people who cared about what was happening to him.  Tens of thousands of others don't seem to have hit the radar of anyone important. So I'd have to disagree that Manning is the somehow the beginning of what pre-trial detention of US citizens will look like under any US law. He's just the beginning of awareness of people who care about it under these particular circumstances.

    "Speak the TRUTH, even if your voice shakes."

    by stellaluna on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 06:41:36 AM PST

    •  So this diary is an awesome opportunity (12+ / 0-)

      for someone to get those other tens of thousands of people on the radar here at dkos, isn't it?

      •  I don't think this diary does that. But I'm sure (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        elwior

        it's an issue that could be diaried.

        "Speak the TRUTH, even if your voice shakes."

        by stellaluna on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 07:17:29 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  But here's a start. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SpecialKinFlag, marleycat, elwior

        I think this was diaried at DKos but didnt receive much attention. I could be wrong. It may not have been diaried at all. Here

        Or

        http://www.salon.com/...

        "Speak the TRUTH, even if your voice shakes."

        by stellaluna on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 07:23:39 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I would support any diaries (11+ / 0-)

          on the topic, for sure.  I've seen this complaint before about Manning but yet I don't see many others taking advantage of this opportunity, when there is a big focus on this issue to step up and write about the widespread use of torture techniques and solitary confinement in this country.

          Why not make it your mission to change that and write more about it?

          I think it is misguided and even unproductive to complain about the focus on Manning's torture if you really care about this issue.  Any attention to the subject should be helpful to the broader issue.  These complaints sound a lot more like a veiled way to oppose Manning by exploiting the issue of inhumane treatment in prisons, which in my mind, is a double negative whammy.  Doubly negative.  

          A much more positive approach would be to take this opportunity to ramp the issue up to the next level while people are paying attention to this.


          "Justice is a commodity"

          by joanneleon on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 07:42:22 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Mainly because I don't have the time. (7+ / 0-)

            My time is spent as a criminal defense attorney fighting these issues in real time. Surely I could try to bring attention here rather than the courts. But my objection is to the implication that Mannings treatment is unique or the beginning of anything. That is a naive position at best. I'm glad Mnnings case gets attention from some. I only object to comments as found in this diary that make it sound like "the beginning" of anything.

            "Speak the TRUTH, even if your voice shakes."

            by stellaluna on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 07:58:55 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I don't know of any US case where someone has been (5+ / 0-)

              kept in solitary/SHU/"the hole" for 9 months straight. At least with federal BOP, they can file a shot.

              My book, TRAITOR: THE WHISTLEBLOWER & THE "AMERICAN TALIBAN," is Amazon's #1 Best Seller in Human Rights Books for February 2012.

              by Jesselyn Radack on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 08:38:43 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  I recall speaking with a Public Defender as to why (5+ / 0-)

              it was taking so long to get my client's case (I was doing Social Work at the time) into Court when it was so clear that she was innocent. Having criminal charges pending in that circumstance is beyond distressing.
                The P.D. was terrific, but he explained that owing to how swamped he was, my client, being out on bail was a lower priority than those in similar circumstances who could not make bail and were suffering on a daily basis.
                As Al Pacino's character said in the movie, And Justice For All  "...the whole system is out of order!"

              "We the People of the United States...." -U.S. Constitution

              by elwior on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 11:26:18 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  It is terribly frustrating to see that happen. (4+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                elwior, RWood, CS in AZ, KenBee

                I've seen defendants in jail or court who have spent more time in pre-trial confinement than they could get even if convicted.  I don't mean to diminish Mr. Mannings treatment.  I just think there are some people who have very little experience with the judicial system who think it is exceptional.  And I don't see any real interest or concern about the tens of thousands of other people in Mr. Mannings situation who don't have celebrity spokespersons.  It makes me think it is not so much the torture that concerns them as it is the attention the "cause" garners for them.

                "Speak the TRUTH, even if your voice shakes."

                by stellaluna on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 12:31:18 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I think in Bradley Manning's case what's going on (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  lunachickie, SpecialKinFlag, KenBee

                  is just so incredibly mean-spirited and blatant.
                     What you are talking about stellaluna isn't mutually exclusive with the subject of this diary. Yes, how ridiculous is it that one man's case gets attention when millions of people are in jails all over the country awaiting their constitutionally right to a speedy trial.
                     But when a case like this one gets the attention it deserves, it's a great time to raise the plight of these others as loud as possible.
                     It's best for us to work together always when issues of injustice come to our attention.
                     And it isn't just that they aren't mutually exclusive, when you think about it, they are in fact interrelated.

                  "We the People of the United States...." -U.S. Constitution

                  by elwior on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 03:04:43 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I completely agree. I think the cases (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    elwior

                    are absolutely interrelated. It is my belief that the diarist doesn't understand this. You have only to look at her erroneous comments in this thread to see that her desire to make Pvt. Mannings "torture" somehow worse to see that her concerns are more for the person she has chosen to promote.  If we all agreed that no one mans freedom or lack thereof is any more important than any other I think I would be fine. Honestly, it is a question of experience in this area. And hers is limited.

                    "Speak the TRUTH, even if your voice shakes."

                    by stellaluna on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 03:46:48 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Stella, I think it's best to cut people a bit (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      KenBee

                      of slack.
                         We're none of us perfect in the things we do or say. I have great admiration for you and unbelievable respect for what you do.
                         On the other hand, I got jammed up for being a whistleblower too, so my respect for Ms. Raddack borders on comradery. I know she doesn't get it right 100% of the time, but who does.
                         I know that people have gotten much worse than what Pvt. Manning did. Their was a man in Orange County who was tortured and degraded and murdered because he couldn't pay bail, and the Deputies running the facility erroneously told the inmates that the man was a child molester. Then they went to watch a baseball game. They received zero punishment.
                          Prosecuting whistleblowers is particularly heinous to me, and not just because of personal experience.
                           Manning 's case may not be the best example of what the system does to people of conscience because he apparently (from what I can tell) went about things the wrong way, though I think his heart was in the right place, and there's no whistleblower's manual to follow.
                           But what they've done to him, (mostly to take revenge, I believe) is abhorrent, and it is willful.
                           His case may not be the worst, but circumstances have made it iconic, and for those fighting for justice, is a cause for all of us.

                      "We the People of the United States...." -U.S. Constitution

                      by elwior on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 04:12:06 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I understand. And I appreciate your comments (0+ / 0-)

                        in this thread. But one thing I have learned particularly when making these types of allegations is that you have to get it right. The first time you exaggerate or say something that is not true is when you lose all credibility. I don't have any criticism for Ms. Radack's when it comes to her goal of bringing attention to Pvt. manning. My criticism is when she gets either the law or the legal situation wrong. Sloppy work allows people to ignore an otherwise important issue.

                        Just like her status as a whistleblower. She doesn't really fit that category because her sharing privileged information with the media about one of the cases she was involved in didn't turn out to be whistleblowing. It turns out the information had already been disclosed. She just assumed it hadn't. And her subsequent career decline is much more likely attributable to the fact that she gave incorrect or incomplete legal advice on the most important case in her career. Again, facts are important. And being sloppy with them matters.

                        "Speak the TRUTH, even if your voice shakes."

                        by stellaluna on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 04:23:22 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

          •  I think it's interesting that you would assume (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            RWood, CS in AZ, elwior

            that someone who spends her entire professional career trying to help people in Bradley Manning's situation would be trying to oppose him.  My real objection is people who only pay attention to the Manning situation because it fits within their comfort zone of the kind of defendant they think is worthy of their focus.  Even then I don't really object.  Any attention is better than none.  I simply objected in this case to the very uninformed and overly dramatic recitation that the treatment of Bradley Manning is the beginning of inhumane treatment of US citizens under US law.

            "Speak the TRUTH, even if your voice shakes."

            by stellaluna on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 12:23:43 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  A lot of people aren't paying attention (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            joanneleon, elwior, lunachickie

            and unfortuntately many progressives and Democrats - who would be screaming bloody murder about this were it happening under Bush, Inc. - have either ignored the issue, or vigorously defended the Obama Administration.

            Never be deceived that the rich will permit you to vote away their wealth. - Lucy Parsons

            by cruz on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 01:01:32 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  I don't think most pretrial detainees are tortured (9+ / 0-)

      in the way Manning was, though I totally agree that there are countless unlawful detentions in the US.

      If Manning's case were in civilian court, he would be able to sue for an Eighth Amendment constitutional violation and collect money damages.

      My book, TRAITOR: THE WHISTLEBLOWER & THE "AMERICAN TALIBAN," is Amazon's #1 Best Seller in Human Rights Books for February 2012.

      by Jesselyn Radack on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 08:34:42 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  The diarist doens't make the (5+ / 0-)

      sweeping claim you attribute to her:

      I'd have to disagree that Manning is the somehow the beginning of what pre-trial detention of US citizens will look like under any US law
      What she says is that it
      foreshadows what "indefinite preventive detention" under the National Defense Authorization Act will look like.
      Her comment was much more specific, about a new law, and your misreading also hints at what distinguishes the Manning case. He was in the custody of the military, a political prisoner abused by the military under the command of the president.

      That doesn't make it worse, of course, than the widespread pre(or post) trial abuse of prisoners, but it makes it different, and logically attracted the attention of activists and bloggers who focus on civil liberties in the realm of national security.

      I agree completely about the shameful lack of attention on the abuse and torture in American jails and prisons, but I don't share your apparent annoyance that Manning's case is received a fair amount, not least because the focus on solitary could--and did, to a degree--spark a wider debate on the topic.

      •  I'm sure you can understand the (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cruz, elwior

        "annoyance" when so many people worry about one middle-classed white man. But yes, it is the case that the interest in Mr. Manning's treatment has more to do with people who are interested in the President's failures in those areas. Which is fine. So long as we don't pretend he is unique or has been singled out.

        "Speak the TRUTH, even if your voice shakes."

        by stellaluna on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 12:47:40 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I think the interest in Manning (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          david mizner, elwior

          has to do with his being imprisoned over an act of conscience. An illegal act, to be sure, but still an act of conscience, and an act that has provided the American public and the world with more information about U.S. foreign policy post-9/11 than probably all mainstream media outlets combined. That was his real crime, as far as I'm concerned - giving us the information we need to function as real citizens. With our government, with most elite Democrats and Republicans, that's unforgivable.

          Never be deceived that the rich will permit you to vote away their wealth. - Lucy Parsons

          by cruz on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 01:04:23 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Actually we are talking about all kinds of (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            CS in AZ, elwior

            people for whom we don't know exactly what they are guilty of.  For all of his notoriety we don't know any more about what he is actually guilty of than we do any other person who is in pre-trial custody.  What we know about his case is what his attorneys, who have used the media very effectively, say he did.  And why they say he did it.  I understand that Pvt. Manning is alleged to have been imprisoned over an "act of conscience".  However, no matter how you define his motivations I don't see how his imprisonment could be any more eggregious than that of an completely innocent person in the same situation.

            But I want to be clear.  My complaint again, is not so much with the attention Mr. Manning gets.  My complaint is more with the hyperbole related to his "torture" that seems to indicate he has been treated so much worse than anyone else in custody.  If you note the comment of the author of the diary above she admits that she doesn't know of any person who has been in solitary for nine months.  A quick google would educate her about this.  I don't mind the reporting of the subject.  I do mind the representation that she is a legal expert when she is in fact a media representative of Mr. Manning.

            "Speak the TRUTH, even if your voice shakes."

            by stellaluna on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 01:53:29 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Whoops, you gave yourself away (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          lunachickie, SpecialKinFlag
          the interest in Mr. Manning's treatment has more to do with people who are interested in the President's failures in those areas.
          Yes, you and you alone are sincerely concerned with human rights whereas those of us speak out against Manning's treatment are motivated by opposition to President Obama and/or race and class prejudice.

          Forgive the self-quote:

          The Bradley Manning case has brought attention to the form of torture known as solitary confinement. Some people here and elsewhere have responded (not unreasonably) by saying, Now you care about solitary? Now that a white solider faces these conditions, you care about solitary?

          But we can and should speak out against solitary confinement regardless of its victim. It doesn't matter who the prisoner is, or what he/she has done: long-term solitary, Super-Max style, is wrong. Manning's struggle against brutal treatment is the same as that of the men in Ohio, and it should be our struggle as well.

          •  Seriously (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            elwior

            the argument that we spend "too much time worrying about this one white guy" is no argument at all. Indeed, it tends to serve as a distraction, as the end result of that--always, intentional or not--is deflection away from the discussion of Manning's case on its merits and into "defense of why Manning is a case at all".

            It's just tiresome.  

            It is time to #Occupy Media.

            by lunachickie on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 03:48:35 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I don't remember saying that I think we spend (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              elwior

              "too much time worrying about this one white guy". If I did I certainly apologize. It has been my intention to encourage people to spend more time worrying about this very important civil rights issue in a more global fashion.  But as it appears that drawing attention to the fact that Pvt Manning is not all that unique is "tiresome" I will leave you all to talk about your one very special case.

              "Speak the TRUTH, even if your voice shakes."

              by stellaluna on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 04:32:04 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  Rec'd, Tipped, Hotlisted (24+ / 0-)

    I have no coherent words to express my extreme frustration with this whole mess.

    My fantasy:  Manning walks free because he was tortured in US custody.

    This is a case of "situational ethics."  My opinion is not a legal opinion, but IF Manning did, in fact, give info to WikiLeaks, I believe it was morally correct to do so.  The Bushista regime's illegal and unconstitutional actions from the time they were installed in office forward demanded that someone, anyone, step forward and present the truth to the American people and the world.

    During the Bushista regime this web site, along with others, tried to get the truth about Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, their "lawyers" who quite patently lied with their pretzel logic trying to make torture legal and two illegal and unconstitutional wars legal.

    Since Obama took the oath of office, he's aided and abetted the previous illegalities and unethical actions carried over from the Bushista regime.  DK and other traditionally Democratic web sites have gone right along with the notion that Obama and his DoJ can cover the sins of the past regimes and add a few of their own [drone strikes that kill innocents] and not be punished for their illegal and unconstitutional war crimes.  [The Norwegians who gave him the Peace Prize must be sitting around with egg on their faces.  They gave a Nobel to someone for essentially NOT being a war criminal at that time, only to be snubbed for part of the ceremony when Obama left early and when he later thumbed his nose at them and continued the Bushista wars and kept their illegal prison at Gitmo open.]

    Meanwhile, no one who is truly guilty is held accountable for the lies and war crimes, and only those who have tried to get the truth to the world have been punished for being morally and ethically righteous.

    I, for one, am tired of it.

    But, as I said, that's only my opinion, and I most assuredly do not have a legal opinion, so it doesn't count.

    I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

    by NonnyO on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 06:47:05 AM PST

    •  Well, I do have a legal opinion, and it's that (15+ / 0-)

      Obama has prosecuted more whistleblowers for allegedly mishandling allegedly classified information than any previous president--and than all previous presidents combined.

      I represent (publicly) two of them: Thomas Drake and John Kiriakou.

      My book, TRAITOR: THE WHISTLEBLOWER & THE "AMERICAN TALIBAN," is Amazon's #1 Best Seller in Human Rights Books for February 2012.

      by Jesselyn Radack on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 08:42:18 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Whatever historical record is ascribed to Obama (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MrJayTee, cruz, elwior, allenjo

        ... IMHO, the fact that he has prosecuted whistleblowers who were only trying to do the right thing and be morally and ethically responsible people will be one of the things that goes in the column:  "Things Obama did that were wrong and/or illegal and/or unconstitutional."

        That list grows longer day by day, while the column for "Things Obama did that were good" is getting shorter and shorter.

        Thanks for representing Thomas and John.  They seem like honest, ethical, and nice people from what I've read of them, and we need more people like them in this world.  I appreciate what they've done.

        I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

        by NonnyO on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 11:40:01 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  so agree, Nonny (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          NonnyO

          The man who ran for office in 2008 bears little to no resemblance to this president in office...........

          "Things Obama did that were wrong and/or illegal and/or unconstitutional." That list grows longer day by day,

          while the column for "Things Obama did that were good" is getting shorter and shorter.

          "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

          by allenjo on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 05:37:35 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  This same man was there... (0+ / 0-)

            ... but most everyone ignored what he said, caught up in the daydreams he projected, so they thought he said what he didn't.

            All the other candidates had already declared impeachment was not something they supported, but I hadn't heard Obama say so until this article dated 2 July '07 (apparently said in an interview on 28 June).  Impeachment, investigation of lies that led to illegal and unconstitutional war, etc., were "my issue" by which I based my support of the candidates.  This article put Obama with the other Dem candidates I could not support for the same identical reasons, so that left out all the "frontrunner candidates."

            Just two weeks after that article, Bill Moyers Journal interviewed John Nichols and Brude Fein.  I still go back and view this every once in a while...

            Kucinich had already brought articles of impeachment to the floor of the House via personal resolution [he's a very eloquent speaker; go to his YouTube channel to see all three - the first one is the longest by some four+hours].  Kucinich also had a not-for-profit single-payer health insurance plan I favored.  Even here on DK he was not taken seriously "because he looks like a dwarf and his ears stick out."  No mention of differences on governing ideas.  They just didn't like him.  [Go figure.  Obama has big ears, too, but he made jokes of them, plus his tall, skinny body, so that defused any reason to diss his ears or his skinniness here on DK.]

            Obama also mentioned "fixing Social Security and Medicare" several times during the endless two+ years' campaign leading up to '08..., but here on DK few or none pointed it out, so that was forgotten or glossed over; no one believed he was serious about it.  He mentioned "fixing" Soc Sec and Medicare in either his acceptance speech at DNC or his inaugural, too (I forget which, or maybe it was both).

            In this YouTube video, listen to his words:
            Obama: "More Moderate-Republican Than Socialist"

            Then there's the number of Repukes Obama has retained or re-hired or appointed to run Dumbya's and Dickie's wars and torture policy, and they added the drone bombings to a large degree once Obama took office.

            I wish Obama would just change his political affiliation to R and put us all out of our misery.  He's in love with himself as the great "bipartisan compromiser" and I think he's wrong, wrong, wrong to pursue that path.  Makes me wonder how rich he will be once he's out of office and who's bribing him to carry out Repuke policies left and right-right-right.

            I wanted to be wrong about my pre-election opinion of how I thought Obama would do in office (ditto the other "frontrunner candidates" who would have proven to be the same, I believe).  So far, he's proved to be worse than I thought he would be.

            Better than McCain-Palin or Mittster-Rand..., but I truly detest feeling coerced into 'voting "for" the lesser of two evils' (that's still voting "for" evil) since I was only voting against those who were disasters waiting to happen.

            I'm sick of attempts to steer this nation from principles evolved in The Age of Reason to hallucinations derived from illiterate herdsmen. ~ Crashing Vor

            by NonnyO on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 06:09:02 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  there are transcripts of courts-martial (6+ / 0-)

    they just aren't given out until after the trial is done and both counsel and the judge can authenticate the transcript as verbatim.

    She wasn't required to read it out loud, but that often happens in cases like this.

  •  Seems like a decent result. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FG

    It's the longest credit ever given (per your diary), though I agree when he's facing a life sentence, they could've probably spared some more time. Still, I don't think mistreatment necessitates an instant release, and calls for the release are really rooted in an opinion that he didn't do anything wrong.

    I see what you did there.

    by GoGoGoEverton on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 07:14:04 AM PST

  •  I am confused about this (7+ / 0-)
    Judge Lind exhaustively spent nearly two hours reading her decision aloud (something that's necessary because there are no transcripts or published decisions in this court-martial)--the subject of collateral litigation and another diary.
    I was following some of Kevin Gosztola's twitter messages yesterday and he mentioned that she was spending hours reading the decision to keep it out of the press.

    So this will never be transcribed or published? wtf?


    "Justice is a commodity"

    by joanneleon on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 07:36:36 AM PST

  •  The memory hole (6+ / 0-)

    Can we get a progressive Senator to introduce a bill making laws prohibiting the retention of records in trials illegal?  National security may require certain facts to be delayed, but what national interest or security concern could be compromised now about something that happened in say, 1930?  Delay the release, but prohibiting the retention of records is just plain a cover-up and a tacit admission of wrong-doing on the part of the government.

    We get what we want - or what we fail to refuse. - Muhammad Yunus

    by nightsweat on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 07:38:25 AM PST

    •  The government often keeps records under seal when (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      glorificus, allenjo, RenMin, elwior, Turbonerd

      in fact the secret information can be redacted out for greater public accountability.

      My book, TRAITOR: THE WHISTLEBLOWER & THE "AMERICAN TALIBAN," is Amazon's #1 Best Seller in Human Rights Books for February 2012.

      by Jesselyn Radack on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 08:47:15 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I used to work with classified information (0+ / 0-)

      and I would get stuff declassified all the time if I thought it shouldn't be classified. In seven years, not once did the security office fail to declassify something when they could not explain to my satisfaction why it needed to remain classified.

      The system works.

      •  The fact you had so many declassified (0+ / 0-)

        Should tell you something.  There has been an explosion in the number of documents classified even since before 9/11.  The knee-jerk reaction towards secrecy is ridiculous in our government.  Combine with Obama's ridiculous anti-whistleblower policies...

        We get what we want - or what we fail to refuse. - Muhammad Yunus

        by nightsweat on Thu Jan 10, 2013 at 06:25:25 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Just an observation, when I think of comments that (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RenMin

    have been made over the many months about President Obama torturing Manning I was expecting to see a headline which confirmed this....  

  •  The Flip Side (11+ / 0-)

    of this SHOULD be General Officer Letters of Reprimands given to everyone in the Quantico Brig chain of command.  At a minimium.  Ultimately, there needs to be an investigation and UCMJ action taken against those sorry "leaders" that took it upon themselves to deal out extra-judicial punishment before any conviction of the accused.  Those involved are not morally fit to hold a comission and need to be shown the door ASAP!  

  •  I have no words to express my disgust (10+ / 0-)

    Manning should be able to sue the DoD  and he should be set free now but this is not possible or probable either.

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 07:57:03 AM PST

  •  asdf (8+ / 0-)

    "There was no intent to punish the accused by anyone in the Marine Corps brig staff or chain of command...
    and that everyone's concern was for Manning's health and getting him safely to trial."

    Typical government bullshit.

    Sounds like an IG report. They are usually whitewashes unless they want to offer up a low level scapegoat.

    Thanks for covering this, not a lot of coverage elsewhere.

  •  American Heroes (11+ / 0-)

    ..both you and Manning. They punished you, too, and no one answered for it. Thank you for being a high-profile voice for whistleblowers.

    If you can find money to kill people, you can find money to help people. --Tony Benn

    by rhetoricus on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 08:16:46 AM PST

    •  Ditto on your comment (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      allenjo, elwior, rhetoricus

      Thanks JR for all of your outstanding diaries and bring to light the abuses that Obama is doing.
      From giving war criminals a pass, to doing his own war crimes by droning countries we have not declared war on.
      Murdering innocent civilians, droning responders and funerals.
      That was not the Hope nor Change I thought I was getting.
      I always look forward to your diaries.

      America never needed so much in the last election and got so little.

      by snoopydawg on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 10:01:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Coombs faith in military justice is (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    glorificus

    suspect, imo. What was he thinking?

    American Television is a vast sea of stupid. -xxdr zombiexx

    by glitterscale on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 09:06:52 AM PST

  •  Thank you for continuing to chronicle (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    elwior, lunachickie

    this horrible, shameful behavior by our government.  I truly appreciate all of your diaries.  

    For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die--Ted Kennedy

    by sobermom on Wed Jan 09, 2013 at 02:48:52 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site