Chelsea Manning has been jailed for refusing to testify at a grand jury about her whistleblowing

Originally published at:


Abolish grand juries. And don’t you fucking dare come at me with the 1 case out of 100 where they do good and don’t just function as a tool of prosecutors.


This is a jailed that has no date of release ?


Contempt of court is like that.

I believe that the punishment for complying (losing the trust of your allies) is worse than the punishment for not complying, and I say that as someone who would not do well in prison.


Is this part of the Mueller investigation into the deep corruption of the administrative branch of the US Federal government? Let’s just remember, Manning was (is?) tied to Wikileaks, which I absolutely feel is itself essentially a puppet of Russia at this point, and was very involved in the throwing of the 2016 Presidential election by a hostile foreign power. Are Manning’s activist associations still inclusive of Wikileaks?

It’s difficult for me to find a ton of sympathy for her at this point, although I guess I have to respect her going along with her morals, even if that means facing jail.

But then again – maybe she’s counting on a pardon by Trump…


Come on, this is just embarrassing. It’s like the Democrat equivalent of QAnon.


The entirety of this statement is lost on me, sorry. I suppose you could try to actually take a stab at my questions, which were not intended to be rhetorical (as your response seems to have been).


She gave data to them nearly ten years ago, long before Assange became a Russian asset. Since coming out of prison she decided her allies were on the left (the early days were worrying as the far right were trying to recruit her too), so I doubt that Wikileaks and Trump want anything to do with her.


I’m just curious – you know this to be the case, definitively, how exactly?

1 Like

Depends; is one of the “allies” she’s refusing to testify against Julian Assange? Because I can’t see any justification to do jail time for that guy.


At this point you could convince people that waterboarding at Guantanamo is justified if Mueller asks for it.


I have met and talked to Daniel Domscheit-Berg several times, including around the time Chelsea Manning gave the data to Wikileaks. He didn’t mention it in any of his many concerns about Julian.

This isn’t evidence of anything, but Daniel is a nicer person than Julian was when I met him.


OK – so you have absolutely no evidence at all to back up your statement that Assange was not in any way connected to Russia at the time of the Manning data dump, other than, someone who possibly might have known about it (and likely would not have) didn’t bring it up to you. Got it!


Hasn’t she suffered enough?

Some people supported Assange when they were getting information that was politically aligned with their views. Now that it’s going the other way, some people don’t like him anymore. It is equally possible that he is knowingly working with Russian intelligence or not. Secret indictments is more questionable than anything Assange has done. This is about the war on transparency.


trust the cops, then?

1 Like

I don’t follow. As far as I can tell most people aren’t arguing for Mueller to get any more investigative authority than prosecutors routinely use on lower-level criminal investigations every day. Nobody is asking for the Mueller investigation to get warrantless searches or lock people up without trial or deny legal counsel to suspects or do anything else that wouldn’t normally be legal.


The problem is that the secret nature of the court means that we wouldn’t know what questions were asked of her. She can say what she told the court but the doubt is already there, as who would admit to betraying their allies?

If she was refusing to go to a public court, where she could refuse to answer questions it would be a different matter.


Stop, you seem to be getting the point. That’s not what people like to do because … something something Trump.

[wanking motion]

Why the false dichotomy? We can have an accountable system for indictment that doesn’t go on civil-rights violating fishing expeditions. (That’s assuming we continue to conceive of police as we currently do… which is not a political outcome I favor.)


Anyone can secretly provide information to law enforcement. You don’t need a grand jury subpoena to rat on your allies. At some point you just have to decide which people to trust.


But a subpeona undermines your credibility instantly. In itself that can be disruptive to operations. You don’t know if someone is a secret bad actor, but you do know if someone is being actively pressured by a grand jury–you just don’t know how or what they’re saying.