Jump to content








Ex-Army intelligence analyst Manning jailed for defying grand jury subpoena


rooster59

Recommended Posts


Manning is acting on the advice of her legal council.

 

She'll give evidence as soon as she has received binding agreement that she herself cannot be prosecuted for the testimony she gives and that her 'commuted' imprisonment cannot be reinforced on the basis of testimony she gives. 

 

My guess is she's looking for an immunity deal.

 

To be very clear, the Grand Jury can only investigate and where, in the considered opinion of the Grand Jury crimes have been committed, file indictments with the Justice Department.

 

The Grand Jury itself cannot convict and any indictments filed by a Grand Jury are subject to trial in open courts of law.

 

---

The bigger question is, while Manning has been subpoenaed to give testimony, who might be the person(s) and/or organisation(s) being scrutinised by the Grand Jury?

 

We'll find out soon enough.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, HLover said:

Disregard, a Google search answers my question.

 

Google translate doesn't help much with "Sheilia" [sic], but if you meant to write "Sheila" my dictionary of English/Australian defines "Sheila" as "girl", "wench", "distaff", "Dutch" and (among many others) "the trouble and strife" if the Sheila is married.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, blazes said:

 

Again, on this thread, a contribution is unusally clear-headed and articulate in attacking the sickly virtue-signalling that has become a cancerous pest in our society.

Thanks, makes good reading.

Here's a story story from another bunch of leftist virtue signallers otherwise known as Fox News:

Chelsea Manning jailed for refusing to testify on Wikileaks

Former Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning has been jailed for refusing to testify to a grand jury investigating Wikileaks.

U.S. District Judge Claude Hilton ordered Manning to jail Friday after a brief hearing in which Manning confirmed she has no intention of testifying. She told the judge she "will accept whatever you bring upon me."

https://www.foxnews.com/us/founder-of-spa-where-robert-kraft-was-charged-with-accused-prostitution-attended-trumps-super-bowl-party-report

 

Not that you didn't make a very profound point by pointing out that referring to transgender people by the gender they prefer "has become a cancerous pest in our society." How many more months do you estimate the USA has to live before it dies riddled with transgender tumors?

 

Et tu, Breitbart?

“I responded to each question with the following statement: ‘I object to the question and refuse to answer on the grounds that the question is in violation of my First, Fourth, and Sixth Amendment, and other statutory rights,” Manning said. “All of the substantive questions pertained to my disclosures of information to the public in 2010 — answers I provided in extensive testimony, during my court-martial in 2013,” she added.

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/03/08/chelsea-manning-jailed-after-refusing-to-testify-in-wikileaks-case/

Edited by bristolboy
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, bristolboy said:

Here's a story story from another bunch of leftist virtue signallers otherwise known as Fox News:

Chelsea Manning jailed for refusing to testify on Wikileaks

Former Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning has been jailed for refusing to testify to a grand jury investigating Wikileaks.

U.S. District Judge Claude Hilton ordered Manning to jail Friday after a brief hearing in which Manning confirmed she has no intention of testifying. She told the judge she "will accept whatever you bring upon me."

https://www.foxnews.com/us/founder-of-spa-where-robert-kraft-was-charged-with-accused-prostitution-attended-trumps-super-bowl-party-report

 

Not that you didn't make a very profound point by pointing out that referring to transgender people by the gender they prefer "has become a cancerous pest in our society." How many more months do you estimate the USA has to live before it dies riddled with transgender tumors?

 

Et tu, Breitbart?

“I responded to each question with the following statement: ‘I object to the question and refuse to answer on the grounds that the question is in violation of my First, Fourth, and Sixth Amendment, and other statutory rights,” Manning said. “All of the substantive questions pertained to my disclosures of information to the public in 2010 — answers I provided in extensive testimony, during my court-martial in 2013,” she added.

https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2019/03/08/chelsea-manning-jailed-after-refusing-to-testify-in-wikileaks-case/

What on earth are you on about?

 Sexuality should have no importance in this so called discussion. (Or since YOU highlighted personal attributes, hate posts)

 Her gender has nothing to do with any debate, nor should it ever be.

 She has been pardoned for releasing information that showed criminal activity at all levels of US security forces.

But US justice says, you show us up to be criminals and we will send you to jail.

And even after you have been pardoned, we will still harass you and send you to jail.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Pilotman said:

Should have been shot for treason long ago. 

She is a whistleblower and has demonstrated bravery under immense pressure. A great deal more ethics than the helicopter gun crew who murdered innocents, including attempted murder of an ambulance crew during the same incident. One can realistic assume they and other crews committed other atrocities. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/apr/05/wikileaks-us-army-iraq-attack

Edited by simple1
  • Confused 2
  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't agree with the commutation Obama gave, but it is a done deal at this point and he served his time. Seems like he's trying to do the right thing here and the government is punishing him to harshest extent possible because of his past behavior, which is wrong. Whole case against Wikileaks is ridiculous since you can't prosecute journalists for covering stories in America so he's definitely on the right side this time. Trump should step in and end this now. Maybe once Mueller report drops he will feel he has the political freedom to act. 

Edited by usviphotography
  • Confused 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Mansell said:

She stated that she was offended by the Grand Jury system which is held in secret, answerable to no one, and is a way to silence political opponents. She opened my eyes on this one. And if you look at history only the lower level of so called traitors go to prison. Look at people like Blunt in England who was spying for the Soviets for years.....no jail time as he was part of the Establishment. We are all programmed to go along with the System and not ask questions, even if it's going to war. It is time to start questioning the System and the people controlling us all. The system is geared up to give minimal education to the masses so they don't ask questions and challenge the status quo.

She stated that she was offended by the Grand Jury system which is held in secret, answerable to no one, and is a way to silence political opponents.”

 

Manning may very well have stated that, but it remains utter hogwash.

 

A Grand Jury has power to investigate and examine criminal activity, it has the power to file indictments with the Justice Department but is not empowered to prosecute.

 

The Grand Jury tests the evidence of high profile, politically sensitive, cases involving people holding public office and (under the 5th Constitutional  Ammendment) capital crimes.

 

Grand Jury hearings are secret, not to hide nefarious deeds by Government but to protect, evidence, witnesses, the reputation of those being investigated and the fairness of any subsequent trial.

 

The accusation that Grand Juries are used to silence political opponents is demonstrably false since in the first instance the Grand Jury is testing ‘accusations’ before a jury (hence a barrier to false accusations) and secondly the Grand Jury does not pass sentence - Indictments  raised by Grand Jury are tried in open court of law.

 

Manning’s claim here is in direct contradiction with the facts of what a Grand Jury is and is empowered or do.

 

 

 

Edited by Chomper Higgot
  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Prissana Pescud said:

What on earth are you on about?

 Sexuality should have no importance in this so called discussion. (Or since YOU highlighted personal attributes, hate posts)

 Her gender has nothing to do with any debate, nor should it ever be.

 She has been pardoned for releasing information that showed criminal activity at all levels of US security forces.

But US justice says, you show us up to be criminals and we will send you to jail.

And even after you have been pardoned, we will still harass you and send you to jail.

You are correct, Manning’s gender is not and should not be an issue.

 

You are incorrect, Manning was not issued a ‘Pardon’, Manning’s ‘sentence was commuted’.

 

You are incorrect, being improsoned for refusing to testify before a Grand Jury is not evidence of harassment.

Receiving a ‘commuted sentence’ for one crime does not give anyone the right to defy the Grand Jury with impunity.

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Prissana Pescud said:

No, she is standing by the constitution.

Anything she says can and may be used against her. Again, and that means double jeopardy.

The only things she revealed to Assange was criminal behaviour by the security services.

And if we do not have a law to protect informers of serious and murderous intent, democracy is in serious trouble.

I suspect if someone has proof that Mr Trump can be proved by someone of collusion,

that would make that person a "traitor" You cannot have it both ways. Manning did the world a favour and showed up the criminals and murderers in US security forces.

 

Manning is refusing to give testimony to a Gtrand Jury. In order to test the veracity of your post above, tell us what crimes is that Grand Jury inquiring into?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You, like the rest of us, have absolutely no evidence of any case being made against Wikileaks on the basis of ‘journalism’.

 

There are however indications (in Indictments against Manafort and Stone) of Wikileaks being investigated for taking part in Russia’s interference in the 2016 US election.

 

If you have evidence that the US Justice Department is in pursuit of Assange for ‘Jounalism’ please present some facts on the matter.

 

Wikileaks is the most respected journalism outfit in the world today, and the alleged case against them is the same as was tried (and failed) against the NY Times in the Pentagon Papers Case. You can not prosecute journalists for reporting news in America. You can prosecute the people who perhaps broke the law in leaking them the news (as was done with Manning originally) but you can't go after the journalists themselves. That is why Obama shut this case down during his Presidency. Deep State revived it because they think the Russian Hoax will prevent Trump from stepping in and doing the same but he should ignore all that and do the right thing. It isn't as if his enemies can increase the amount of bitching any higher than current levels. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, usviphotography said:

 

Wikileaks is the most respected journalism outfit in the world today, and the alleged case against them is the same as was tried (and failed) against the NY Times in the Pentagon Papers Case. You can not prosecute journalists for reporting news in America. You can prosecute the people who perhaps broke the law in leaking them the news (as was done with Manning originally) but you can't go after the journalists themselves. That is why Obama shut this case down during his Presidency. Deep State revived it because they think the Russian Hoax will prevent Trump from stepping in and doing the same but he should ignore all that and do the right thing. It isn't as if his enemies can increase the amount of bitching any higher than current levels. 

Your claim that ‘Wikileaks is most respected journalism outfit in the world today’ is unfounded.

 

What ‘alleged case’ against Wikileaks?

 

An allegation in an indictment that you can reference as fact?

(AKA a factual allegation).

 

OR

 

An allegation that the US Justice Department has an allegation in an indictment that you can’t reference as fact?

(AKA a non factual allegation of an allegation).

 

”Deep State”

 

I’ll no encourage you on that hogwash.

 

Show is facts.

 

  • Sad 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...