Hacker News Reader

Comment by _delirium | Hacker News Reader

Obama doesn't seem to completely disagree, since he didn't pardon her. He instead commuted the sentence from 35 years to 7 years' imprisonment. In my personal opinion that's still too long for the crime, but it's at least less completely insane than 35 years.

View on HN

also being tortured in custody and put into solitary is much for the crime. I don't understand why Obama had to wait so long (couldn't he have, at least done it two or three months ago?) and why he's letting Chelsea stay in the pen till summer? Why not let her out more or less now?

Likely in the hopes that the story won't be as big a deal when she's actually released, and won't receive as much attention from potentially dangerous people.

Because the date of Manning's release (May 17th) is international LGBT day

Or, as they say in the article, that's 4 months from now, a somewhat reasonable time (considering it could have been 28 years and 4 months) to finish everything up, get her affairs on the outside settled, and all the bureaucracy done.

the commutation could have been done 2 months ago to allow for reasonable time. Also, it's not like the president doesn't have the resources or authority to accelerate it. Pardon my cynicism, but (not that I have any sympathy for the incoming president) it seems more like a political ploy to put the incoming president in a conflict where the president is tempted to do something deeply unethical to be politically consistent.

But why does she have to remain in prison until then? Can't they at least put her in the equivalent of "gardening leave"?

It's a bit of a stretch to assume the timing of this massive batch of pardons and commutes was predicated on making her release (which includes a mandatory grace period) line up with that holiday.

I would say that makes it worse. Don't you risk making it a token/pandering act instead of doing what is (arguably) the right thing to do?

The military justice has a possibility for parole release before the term, unlike U.S. federal civil justice. So there was always the possibility of a such release.

https://www.emptywheel.net/2013/08/21/bradley-mannings-sente...

Thanks, I didn't realize the military had retained parole after the rest of the federal government abolished it. If I'm reading the link correctly, 10 years would have been the minimum time served in this case. If it were likely that parole would be granted at the earliest point of eligibility (would it be? I have no idea), this commutation then amounts to knocking 3 years off the minimum sentence. Which is not nothing, but less dramatic than the headline 28 years.

he did pardon Marine General James Cartwright who released details about the cyber attacks on Iran. That one is was a surprise

He didn't release details. He lied to investigators to deflect their attention from the real leaker. Sort of like how Martha Stewart was convicted of making false statements to Federal agents.

Is that the conventional wisdom? I thought the consensus was that he probably was the source for David Sanger's book, but that the federal government didn't want the exposure of litigating the case, so it was resolved in the end by him agreeing to plead guilty to a lesser offense of, roughly, "lying under oath about not being the leaker", without being actually charged with the leak itself.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com