30 ms·

Well, regardless of your opinion of Assange, he cannot be guilty of traitorous activity. He is not a US citizen or even resident. He is not in a position to ha

Well, regardless of your opinion of Assange, he cannot be guilty of traitorous activity. He is not a US citizen or even resident. He is not in a position to have committed treason against the US. Might he have committed crimes against the US? Sure, if the conspiracy to break into US Gov systems charge is true. Now Manning? That was treason, arguably during a time of war. Once upon a time, that was a summary execution. Manning got off easy with the 35 year initial sentence and even easier after Obama commuted the sentence.

austincheney 7y ago
Manning wasn’t convicted of treason though. You cannot apply sentencing for charges not convicted. 35 years was excessive sentencing for Manning’s conviction. Considering the volume and seriousness of conduct a sentence of 5-8 years would have been more appropriate as compared to other related convictions.
- hermitdev 7y ago
  Whether convicted or not, Manning was found guilty of disclosing tens of thousands of classified documents to someone/some organization Manning knew that was intent on publicly disclosing that information, thus aiding an enemy in a time of war, aka, treason. Manning may not have been convicted of treason, but it is obvious from the crimes Manning was convicted of, and the circumstances under which the crimes were committed, that treason was committed. IANAL, but it seems to me that given the conviction they were able to get, prosecution could have easily gotten a treason conviction as well. Seems to me to have been more of a political play. Obama got a "win" in being tough on leakers of classified info, got a tough sentence, and then with a wink of the eye on the way out the door after 2 terms commutes the sentence (yes, not a full pardon). Like I said, stinks of political interference and nothing to do about the totality of the crime(s) committed.
  - austincheney 7y ago
    Manning was convicted of a real crime, a felony. It doesn't matter how much you wish Manning were convicted of anything else. Manning could only be sentenced for the crimes convicted.

austincheney 7y ago

Manning wasn’t convicted of treason though. You cannot apply sentencing for charges not convicted. 35 years was excessive sentencing for Manning’s conviction. Considering the volume and seriousness of conduct a sentence of 5-8 years would have been more appropriate as compared to other related convictions.

hermitdev 7y ago
Whether convicted or not, Manning was found guilty of disclosing tens of thousands of classified documents to someone/some organization Manning knew that was intent on publicly disclosing that information, thus aiding an enemy in a time of war, aka, treason. Manning may not have been convicted of treason, but it is obvious from the crimes Manning was convicted of, and the circumstances under which the crimes were committed, that treason was committed. IANAL, but it seems to me that given the conviction they were able to get, prosecution could have easily gotten a treason conviction as well. Seems to me to have been more of a political play. Obama got a "win" in being tough on leakers of classified info, got a tough sentence, and then with a wink of the eye on the way out the door after 2 terms commutes the sentence (yes, not a full pardon). Like I said, stinks of political interference and nothing to do about the totality of the crime(s) committed.
- austincheney 7y ago
  Manning was convicted of a real crime, a felony. It doesn't matter how much you wish Manning were convicted of anything else. Manning could only be sentenced for the crimes convicted.