Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Ash_F

(5,861 posts)

21. Constitution>treaties>Federal law>state law

Reply to snot (Reply #8)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 02:47 PM

Dec 2012

That information was classified by federal law, which is trumped by treaties, and not the constitution. So yes, you are right. They are trying to get him on the technicality that he did not go to a Senator with the information first and is therefore not protected by federal whistle-blowing laws which require it.

In reality, they are just furious that someone tried to break through the morass of propaganda about the government's unfaltering benevolence.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

22 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Bradley Manning trial postponed amid debate over pre-trial confinement [View all] struggle4progress Dec 2012 OP

I am somewhat confused by this. grantcart Dec 2012 #1

this is pre-trial hearing stuff, which lays groundwork for the trial struggle4progress Dec 2012 #2

Yes, you seem to be missing a lot of something. JackRiddler Dec 2012 #3

That's not what Manning's lawyer describes as a 'typical day' for his client--- msanthrope Dec 2012 #7

Is there any difference between that and solitary, in the legal sense? Solitary is punishment. freshwest Dec 2012 #9

I want to direct you to my post number 15... msanthrope Dec 2012 #16

Your selective and abusive use of facts is noted. JackRiddler Dec 2012 #13

Nonsense...Manning's lawyer is far more believable on this issue than msanthrope Dec 2012 #15

Thanks for referring me to this reply. Was he given psychological counseling on the suicide issue? freshwest Dec 2012 #17

No I got that. grantcart Dec 2012 #22

This phrase in the article '...has effectively admitted...' freshwest Dec 2012 #4

I believe that is a reference to the fact that the defense has requested (and has been granted) struggle4progress Dec 2012 #5

Wow. Thanks, s4p. I wonder if military folks would chime in on how *bad* his actions were. freshwest Dec 2012 #6

Many have argued that leaking US's war crimes is actually required snot Dec 2012 #8

That argument might carry a lot more weight if he were being tried in an international court hughee99 Dec 2012 #18

Constitution>treaties>Federal law>state law Ash_F Dec 2012 #21

Over In The Badlands USMCMustang Dec 2012 #10

I hope the courts throw out the case because of how they treated him. hrmjustin Dec 2012 #11

Don't hold your breath. n/t Angleae Dec 2012 #12

It's not in the courts. JackRiddler Dec 2012 #14

This Manning Trial is PURE Military Kangaroo Court at it's heart, the details are of no Consequence sally5050 Dec 2012 #19

He's been punished enough for his rule breaking. Give him a bad discharge and VA healthcare. Sunlei Dec 2012 #20