Chelsea Manning's sentence for giving secret documents to WikiLeaks commuted by Obama

[TAKODA]

 

 

My personal opinion is that our voters were not too damn pliable in this election cycle.

 

 

 

Donald Trump is being sworn in as President of the United States tomorrow.

I honestly have no idea how your response pertains to what you quoted me on.

JJ: Just guessing but, I suspect he is saying the voters obviously were, because we see the end result!

 

However, I say this with great trepidation, as it is rumored that I lack the mental wherewithal, jk LLOMS,

[Danny Bateman]

Update:

 

 

I for one am shocked.

[knapplc]

I never presumed that was real. Further, I don't think it fits well into a US narrative to have him become a martyr by going to jail for what many around the world think is a good thing (disclosing American perfidy).

[JJ Husker]

That's a very interesting article and good post mortem on the election. Thanks for linking it Q.

 

It would indicate that I have under estimated the amount of undecided voters and the effect of the hack job on the election results. I have admitted I may be wrong and this would indicate that I quite likely was wrong. I probably have let me personal disdain for both candidates cloud my perception of how other voters felt and how pliable they were to being swayed by what I viewed as just another pile of dirt on Hillary and the DNC.

 

However, I would still maintain that it was US voters who decided this election by casting their votes and that a bigger influence on that was how the media presented and portrayed the candidates chances at winning. I think the bigger take away from that article is how and why the media got it so wrong. Not that I want the media to try to influence elections but it is rather obvious that they did, albeit conversely, by not acknowledging the legitimate chance Trump had to win it. I think maybe we were all guilty of that. I sure thought it was going to be a runaway HRC victory. How much of that was due to the subliminal media message, I guess we'll never know but I have to believe it was at least as influential as the release of the Comey report.

 

Anyway I'll try to refrain from continuing this discussion in this thread because it is somewhat off topic.

[ColoNoCoHusker]

 

 

[...] I would still maintain that it was US voters who decided this election [...]

 

 

Wouldn't that always be the case, at least in theory? The issue is how those voters were influenced. Whether the media is good or bad, outside the fake news sector, the media typically runs with some semblance of the "events". If those are being influenced by another country, that is a big issue.

 

It is the same problem our Founding Fathers identified with the need for an educated citizenry. That doesn't necessarily mean a college degree, rather literate folks using critical thinking skills. I think way too many voters are unwilling to research and vet politicians/policy/issues/etc. While we need voters across the board to be better participants, we also need to take an extremely strong stand against ANY external entities trying to influence our elections in any direction. The fact it was so feasible for Putin to influence even 1% of our voters should be very distressing us all...

 

As far as the other points, I am often split on whistle-blowers like Manning. On the the one-hand, I can see her actions being viewed as a betrayal of her duties. On the other hand, I can see where Manning believed her actions, while violating NDR/Secrecy rules, was actually her way of upholding the Constitution and in the true spirit of our Republic. Profiting from releasing secrets is absolutely treason. Attempting to shed light on some dark activities, AND PAYING THE PRICE FOR IT, seems closer to "conscientious objector" status in WWI... Interesting delimma

[Landlord]

It's not like the media was ignoring the possibility - they couldn't acknowledge something that they, or anyone else, thought existed.

[JJ Husker]

It's not like the media was ignoring the possibility - they couldn't acknowledge something that they, or anyone else, thought existed.

 

 

The media sure as hell, for all intents and purposes, ignored the possibility that Trump could actually win the election. I don't believe that is really even contestable.

 

Read the link that Q posted above to see how their judgement was clouded by their preference for Hillary to be elected and for their ham-fisted approach at interpreting polling data. The hack job may well have been just enough to flip it to Trump but I believe our own media and possibly pollsters played a much more important role in helping to determine the outcome. And that is not to say they were pro Trump or anti Hillary but rather that they provided the incentive for many voters to show up and vote how they did.

[zoogs]

IIRC, the media covered Trump's chances fairly. They were close at various points in the summer, and then the gulf really widened. There appeared to be no hope.

 

Then the Comey letter came down, the polls seriously narrowed, and while people still felt Hillary could win, it was a lot less sure of a thing than before. And it did, ultimately, come down to narrow margins in a few states where late-breaking voters broke for Trump.

[HuskerNation1]

An interesting developement?

Can somebody explain why Obama is not being crucified for this in this forum?

 

Didn't she leak important secrets that compromised our national security and put American lives at risk? Why would Obama pick her for a presidential pardon?

 

I'll be honest, I don't know know much about it but it seems pretty I'll advised, or maybe worse, on the part of Obama.

Obama can do no wrong for many in this forum. Just as the press did for 8 years with him (outside of the Obamacare rollout debacle), a vast majority of HB posters in this forum will give him a free pass or find somebody else to blame.

[ZRod]

 

An interesting developement?

Can somebody explain why Obama is not being crucified for this in this forum?

Didn't she leak important secrets that compromised our national security and put American lives at risk? Why would Obama pick her for a presidential pardon?

I'll be honest, I don't know know much about it but it seems pretty I'll advised, or maybe worse, on the part of Obama.

Obama can do no wrong for many in this forum. Just as the press did for 8 years with him (outside of the Obamacare rollout debacle), a vast majority of HB posters in this forum will give him a free pass or find somebody else to blame.

Provide proof of your accusations please. This claim that "liberals" here refuse to criticize, or give Obama a pass, I'd like to know what threads you read where he is revered above Pope Francis.

[Scratchtown]

 

So why, if they're OK with that kind of leak, are they not OK with Manning's kind? What's the difference here?

I can't believe this question was actually typed out. smh

 

 

Jesus, no kidding...

[Scratchtown]

 

Because they have absolutely no shame with no aversion for rampant hypocrisy. That makes you effective at accomplishing your goals, even if tarnishes you among us common folk.

And this doesn't cut both ways?

 

Nope. Because dems are better than reps. Duh! We're nuthin but a bunch of Gall Darned Rednecks from the midwest! We don't even have electricity yet!

 

"EQUALITY EQUALITY!!!!"

[Scratchtown]

The relationship is that both involved illicitly acquired intelligence. Manning has been condemned by Republicans, whereas Assange/WikiLeaks/Russia have been praised by Republicans.

Ya. Exactly. Manning put us in harms way.

 

WikiLeaks exposed a fraud/corrupt campaign/candidate.

 

You realize how they stay on the same side with their support, right? The side that would be doing right.

[ZRod]

 

The relationship is that both involved illicitly acquired intelligence. Manning has been condemned by Republicans, whereas Assange/WikiLeaks/Russia have been praised by Republicans.

 

Ya. Exactly. Manning put us in harms way.

 

WikiLeaks exposed a fraud/corrupt campaign/candidate.

 

You realize how they stay on the same side with their support, right? The side that would be doing right.

You realize Manning exposed the US killing civilians and journalist too right?

[knapplc]

 

 

So why, if they're OK with that kind of leak, are they not OK with Manning's kind? What's the difference here?

I can't believe this question was actually typed out. smh

 

Jesus, no kidding...

 

 

This is the kind of response you get when someone A) Doesn't understand the question, B) Doesn't understand the answer, C) Can't explain it if neither A nor B are true.