Manning not guilty of aiding the enemy, but convicted of multiple other counts

I thought this was an interesting tidbit from the Center for Constitutional Rights.<p>&quot;While the &quot;aiding the enemy&quot; charges (on which Manning was rightly acquitted) received the most attention from the mainstream media, the Espionage Act itself is a discredited relic of the WWI era, created as a tool to suppress political dissent and antiwar activism, and it is outrageous that the government chose to invoke it in the first place against Manning. Government employees who blow the whistle on war crimes, other abuses and government incompetence should be protected under the First Amendment.<p>We now live in a country where someone who exposes war crimes can be sentenced to life even if not found guilty of aiding the enemy, while those responsible for the war crimes remain free. If the government equates being a whistleblower with espionage or aiding the enemy, what is the future of journalism in this country? What is the future of the First Amendment?<p>Manning’s treatment, prosecution, and sentencing have one purpose: to silence potential whistleblowers and the media as well. One of the main targets has been our clients, WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, for publishing the leaks. Given the U.S. government’s treatment of Manning, Assange should be granted asylum in his home country of Australia and given the protections all journalists and publishers deserve.<p>We stand in solidarity with Bradley Manning and call for the government to take heed and end its assault on the First Amendment.&quot;<p><a href="http://ccrjustice.org/newsroom/press-releases/ccr-condemns-manning-verdict%2C-questions-future-of-first-amendment" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;ccrjustice.org&#x2F;newsroom&#x2F;press-releases&#x2F;ccr-condemns-m...</a>

I was prepared to be outraged at the verdict after the defense appeal to vacate the &#x27;aiding enemy&#x27; charge was thrown out by the judge the other day[0], but being found not guilty is very important in terms of both his sentence and precedent for future military whistleblowers.<p>It also vindicates the defense decision to stick with a military hearing rather than a ~~civil~~ jury[1], which almost certainly could have been stacked to find a guilty verdict on the aiding the enemy charge (especially in Virginia - the preferred jurisdiction for fed government prosecution because of the slanted jury pool of ex-military and ex-gov types).<p>This is probably the best Manning could have hoped for, the evidence was stacked heavily against him on the other charges and he had already pleaded guilty to most.<p>[0] <a href="http://www.thenation.com/blog/175355/judge-refuses-throw-out-key-aiding-enemy-charge-against-pfc-bradley-manning" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.thenation.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;175355&#x2F;judge-refuses-throw-out...</a><p>[1] Thanks mpayne, you&#x27;re right - military jury

This is a pretty balanced verdict, in my opinion. It upholds the law without further perpetuating the reputation of the US government as a body that will cry &quot;enemy combatant!&quot; and &quot;terrorism!&quot; at every political opportunity.<p>Not that that still doesn&#x27;t happen, of course.

Manning is far more heroic than any other serving member of the Military-Industrial-Surveillance Complex.<p>Shoot, this &quot;war&quot; isn&#x27;t even declared so I&#x27;m unsure how he could even be accused of aiding an undeclared enemy.

Too bad Manning wasn&#x27;t illegally torturing people, Obama would have let him destroy any evidence and blocked any investigation.

Manning is probably facing life in prison on the espionage charges. The acquittal on aiding the enemy is interesting, but practically not that important.

Here is a useful chart explaining the charges and verdict, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/national/manning-verdict" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.washingtonpost.com&#x2F;wp-srv&#x2F;special&#x2F;national&#x2F;mannin...</a>

He faces up to 130 years in prison. Wow.

Yeah but they all boil down to the central charge of &quot;embarrassing the government&quot;.

So I read (on wikipedia so not the best source) the key tenants of the espionage act which he was found guilty under. I find it to be written generally enough to be ambiguous in a similar vein to recent laws such as the NDAA not really defining hostilites and enemies. I wonder what are the limitations on it? Was the constitutional definition of treason not enough. Again I feel like overly broad language in a law used to convict people that politicians deem need to be convicted.<p>edit: I think this further proves my point&#x2F;adds to its ambiguousness <a href="http://rt.com/usa/court-ruling-whistleblowers-prosecution-768/" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;rt.com&#x2F;usa&#x2F;court-ruling-whistleblowers-prosecution-76...</a>

Military judge? Military lawyer? Military jail? Seems pretty.. well.. fascist (in the original meaning of the word).

Yes! I&#x27;m at work but started cheering in my chair when I read the verdict of Not Guilty on aiding the enemy. Was truly expecting the worse with that, but to hear a &quot;not guilty&quot; charge on this was very reassuring.

Its a sad day for truth... and a sad day from democracy

His leak stopped the Iraq war.

interesting read i submitted an hour ago: <a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6127558" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=6127558</a><p>Edit: IMHO interesting.

I commend Manning for sticking around to face the music and not going AWOL. As such, in my eyes, he&#x27;s way more of a genuine activist than Snowden.<p>There can be no Letter from Birmingham Jail without the jail.