#12
Post
by Chuks » Wed Jan 18, 2017 3:28 am
Manning should never have been left with access to that information in the first place. Doing that is called "enabling." Alison is correct in that what he did was an act of profound self-harm, while the rest of you are also correct in calling him (as he was at the time) a traitor, since he inflicted harm on the USA by giving the information away; he did not sell it.
Like Snowden, Manning did something that was sure to bring pee upon himself, not seeming to understand the consequences, so that Snowden now sits in Moscow, which must be about as much fun as Fort Leavenworth. (A bad day in Moscow must be about as much fun as a good day at Fort Leavenworth. Too, when Vladimir needs to make nice to the USA, what better present to his best friend Donald than Snowden? Fit Snowden up somehow, perhaps discovering that he's violated the terms of his stay, and off he goes.) Meanwhile, Assange, that genius, is reduced to haunting the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, when one mistake will see him sent to the States to end up in a Supermax for the rest of his life.
What we have now is a crazy trans-sexual who seems to have suffered enough, going by modern, wishy-washy standards. Let her get on with her life after eight years and call that pardon an act of mercy.
Simply doing an act of mercy can be annoying and seen as wrong to some of us , no matter who the beneficiary is, let alone a trans-sexual traitor. Trump probably would have very much enjoyed seeing Manning suffer. This might be Obama spoiling his fun in one small way. Let's see what the Orange One has to say about this in his next tweet.