The government opposed all witnesses requested by the defense, except ones that the government is also calling as witnesses, according to a new filing from the defense team. That works out to 38 of the 48 witnesses Manning’s defense attorney David E. Coombs asked permission to call to the stand, when the Article 32 hearing commences Dec. 16 in Maryland, according to a new filing from the defense team. full article
Few Americans Feel Better Off Than They Were Last Year
When Frugality Crosses the Line
Help in Choosing an Estate Planning Firm
Credit Report Errors: How Have You Handled Them?
A Tax Strategy for 529 College Savings Accounts
What Do All of Your Tax Breaks Add Up To?
Summing Up Your Job in Just Six Words
Will Low Rates Influence Your Behavior?
Behind the Curtain at Your 401(k) Plan
Shining a Light on Your 401(k) Costs
SafetyBook Helps Sort Out Product Recalls
How Rebalancing Takes Emotion Out of Investing
Famous Last Words: No More Stocks Ever!
How Rising Stock Prices Can Fool You
The Case for Ignoring the Stock Market
House Renovation Tips From Insurers
Resolved: Save for What Matters
Private Offerings Come With Many Caveats
Finding Cheaper Textbooks: 2nd Edition
Resolved: Shift to a Savings-Oriented Budget
The Risk of Gold and Treasury Bills Right Now
Things to Do on Your Financial Tuneup Day
For Those Still Wary of the Stock Market
A Special Section: Money Through the Ages
The Financial Hurdles Gay Couples Face
What the Gay Marriage News Means for You
Consumer Reports Offers New Comparison Tool
Delta Says It Will Refund Airfare Tax
An Unvarnished Critique of Your Finances
A Gay Couple’s Tax Predicament
More Employers Equalize Health Benefits for Gay Workers
You Don’t Want to Be an American Idiot
Teach for America Equalizes Health Costs for Domestic Partners
Gay Couples Closer to Receiving Medicaid Spousal Protections
Resolved: Make Some Financial Choices
When Market Is in Turmoil, Fight the Urge to React
A Tire Engineer’s Tips for Better Gas Mileage
New Credit Card Rules Make Pricing Clearer, Study Says
Out of Office: Call Bernanke in Case of Emergency
Stay-at-Home Moms and the Need for Credit
When Television Feeds the Urge to Trade
Getting a Student Rate When You’re Not a Student
Do Health Savings Accounts Make for Savvy Patients?
A Fair A.T.M. Fee? Many Consumers Say Zero
How Airlines Fared in the Hurricane Irene Test
Secured Credit Cards: Not Everyone Qualifies
Renewed Interest in Dividend-Paying Stocks
Resolved: Distinguish Hindsight From Foresight
guilty because military says you are. No need for facts, they just get in way. So does innocence until proven guilty.
They aren't even bothering to disguise the fact that this is going to be a kangaroo court.
Haha couldn't have said it better. It will be so one sided. Don't F with the govt and steal their docs. They will do whatever they want to make you pay and make sure you won't win.
No matter how guilty a person may seem to be, EVERYONE deserves the right to a fair trial. No one is too important to be called do to their civic duty. In fact our leaders most of all should be ready to demonstrate this. The idea the military would present that argument is sickening. Anyone the defense can show has a relevant and clear reason to be called should be made to appear barring a national emergency in which case the trial should be delayed.
Looking at historical examples of similar events, his chances of a fair trial are pretty much nil.
Do you think people have said that since the country was formed? I feel like I am just repeating a cliche uselessly every time I say something like that, but GD does it feel like the world has lost its mind. It is truly amazing that people have not straight up Mars'd (I hope that's the first time Mars has been used as a verb) the planet yet.
This is a motion for part PRE-TRIAL hearing, if the government wishes to oppose having the couple of hundred people wasting their time being interrogated about how they tied their shoes the day the investigated Manning then so be it. If they are denied without grounds (and no one has heard the governments grounds yet), then that is another thing. Manning has not had his day in court yet and since his current defense is 'they were dumb enough to let me use their classified network,' Having been around military justice I can tell you Manning had one foot in a bucket trying to dance the cha-cha when he brought in a civilian attorney (convening authorities hate civilian lawyers). From everything I have seen, read, heard he is praying to not spend the rest of his life in a very unpleasant hotel eating government issue food alone in a cell (if he smart in voluntary solitary confinement).
If someone shares classified information, it's considered treason. There's no grey area in the argument. Whether or not he gets what you would like to be a 'fair trial' he's going to be punished for what he did. Stop trolling.
His guilt has not been established. The government has simply declared "that guy did it" and haven't bothered showing the evidence yet. And the sharing of classified information is not treason. See the Pentagon Papers. Ellsberg was alleged to have shared classified information and his case was dismissed because the government people were a bunch of incompetent nitwits. This situation is very similar.
guilt is what the trial is for, the defense is trying to keep the trial from every happening because of the evidence that will be introduced.
Officially, no, his guilt hasn't been established. But they do have enough evidence to stick to him. Recorded and documented conversations, him accessing the info during a mass download, and so on. Why do you think his attorney is trying to play the deteriorating emotional health card? Because that is all they have, and all they can use, not that he was completely innocent and that he didn't do it. That, and the Ellsberg case had some similiarties, but they are different, and in different times with the new stricter everyone is a terrorist laws.
apparently from the position that the defense is taking, there isn't a question about whether Manning did or did not leak the info. seems that it's somebody else's fault. something else made him do it.
He decided to become a traitor. He should take his medicine like a man.
It irkes me no end that I have kin that have the Manning name and that I might be related to this piece of dung.
He is a patriot (for a lack of a better word) to the people of US.
He exposed criminals and war crimes against humanity, his mental health seeing such horrid activities working under the fear of what did happen to him - torture, removal of humanity and his more than likely life incarceration - would drive any decent human to depression.
Sorry Robert, I don't know you but seriously the US Govt and Army are the biggest Traitor to humankind and the planet, fullstop! You must see this?
The killing of journalists and other Iraqi civilians including a man who stopped to administer first aid to the victims and the attempted killing of the man's two children and the subsequent cover-up by the United States Government. It's all right there on Collateral Murder. The Wikileaks documents show other examples. Free Bradley Manning.
AS the courts have stated, insurgents who use non combatants as shields , are the ones at fault when military targets them.
for the learning impaired, yes it is valid under the GC to target a group when part of the group are armed insurgents. the presence of the reporters does not make it illegal to target the armed mahdi militiamen.
/and you can read the multiple articles over on the jawa report showing the background facts. So alex care to tell me where my info is wrong or can you cite some factual account of the incident? please try.
@pixelpusher. please tell me where the GC is invalidated as a whole over a categorical violation. next please show I am wrong & that war crime charges are being pursued. I gave the legal reason they are not. please prove otherwise if you can. waiting...
Bradley Manning, a U.S. hero & patriot, did what any TRUE American would do ~
Report War Crimes & the War Criminals who ORDERED infinite numbers of soldiers to carry out the U.S. Gov't & Military's heinous crimes. U.S. Gov''t & Military turn their backs on countless soldiers, many now dead due to severe PTSD caused by carrying out these crimes, being victims of these crimes and armed with the knowledge the wars they fought in are NOT for our freedom, NOT for our safety, NOT for our democracy, NOT because of the 'war on terror's' fear flavor of the week. Manning & all other true American patriots know the "War on Terror" is indefinitely and infinitely, any person, place or thing. They know the staggering amount of innocent civilians & military being tortured and killed for nothing more than greed. They know the U.S. war machine, the FED and corporations (with more rights than they have) continue to churn out inconceivable amounts of money...Money going straight into the hands of the REAL traitors who led them and the U.S., funded with U.S. tax payer dollars, into wars based solely on their trumped up, signed, sealed and delivered straight to your living room, bill of bull shit. You, sir, have bought into that bull shit and the traitors, hook, line and sinker, along with those just like you....incapable of independent, critical thinking and distinguishing fact from fiction. Sit back, relax, continue to watch and listen to the talking heads who, after hours of makeup & hair, take their rightful place in front of the pre-programmed propaganda-prompter to do your thinking for you, feeding you your daily dose of dung.
I wonder what people will say in 20 years. I have read about trials like this from decades past, some from the very genisis of the security clearnce system. In general history ends up taking a much better view of the accused then the government.
Did you miss the part where "The government opposed all witnesses requested by the defense, except ones that the government is also calling as witnesses"? Could the bias be more obvious?
Did you miss the part about all of those witnesses being there to talk about his emotional state to mitigate the punishment and the part about the court allowing written testimony from those people since they won't be put on the stand and the part about him wanting to call the president to the stand? Most of the comments seem to be from people calling foul on the government when they don't even seem to have read the entire article.
This is not the trial. This is Art. 32 hearing. So no, he can't have 100 witnesses, however once his treason trial starts he can call hundred of them and his gay ex boyfriend if he chooses so.
Poor baby. He leaked thousands of classified documents and now people want the USA to just kiss and make up...maybe discharge him and give him a little pat on the boom-boom on the way out the door.
Manning had better hope a "friend of the court" brief isn't filed that documents the execution of anyone who was "outed" by Manning's data dump.
He did not have the right to do what he did. We can't run a country and have every Tom, Dick, and Harry deciding for himself what is to be kept secret and what isn't. He could have release the information to a congressman or senator, but not Wikileaks.
Sorry, but your hero is toast. The only question is how long will he serve. My guess is thirty years.
Maybe Obama will pardon him on his way out. Fat chance on that. Bradly has run out of friends now that his fifteen minutes of fame have passed.
The thing that irks me about this is nothing that was released really should have been a secret. The government should not be in the business of keeping secrets from its citizens, as it prevents the proper monitoring of government by its citizenry. Now don't get me wrong I am not saying the plans to nuclear missiles should be available, however people should not have to guess what their government is doing. Additionally, our "Defense" department should be engaged in actual defense instead of Offense and in defense a good deterrent is generally best, the cold war never went really really hot now did it? However they only works if people know they exist so our military shouldn't really be hiding what its doing. If actions are justified by the situation then there should be nothing to hide.
He is alleged to have leaked documents. That is different than "he leaked thousands of classified documents." And we can run a country where everybody decides for themselves what to keep secret. That is what pure democracy is. Also, regarding classified documents, the government has a certain fondness for classifying ALL documents, despite the Dear Leader's claims that his administration would be more transparent.
While I agree, I must point out that Civilian government has never been known to have good control over levels of security the US military practices.
Let's don't forget, we voted for the Congresspeople who allow this to go on. Militarism but also with lax safety regulations for Wall Street, consumer, pollution, food inspections - everything.
Sounds like a very expensive hooker to me, maybe you should join her - you qualify.
