Wednesday, January 18, 2017

Obama's commutation of 35 year sentence for transgender traitor causes outrage

Top Congressional Republicans condemned Tuesday the decision by President Barack Obama to commute former Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning’s 35-year prison sentence for leaking classified documents.

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., blasted the decision, calling it “outrageous.”

“Chelsea Manning’s treachery put American lives at risk and exposed some of our nation’s most sensitive secrets. President Obama now leaves in place a dangerous precedent that those who compromise our national security won’t be held accountable for their crimes,” Ryan said in a statement.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said the decision was a “grave mistake.”

"It is a sad, yet perhaps fitting commentary on President Obama’s failed national security policies that he would commute the sentence of an individual that endangered the lives of American troops, diplomats, and intelligence sources by leaking hundreds of thousands of sensitive government documents to Wikileaks, a virulently anti-American organization that was a tool of Russia’s recent interference in our elections."

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla, went on further to echo the statements of Ryan and McCain.

“It is shameful that President Obama is siding with lawbreakers and the ACLU against the men and women who work every day to defend our nation and safeguard U.S. government secrets.”

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas, told Fox News that while pardons are a Constitutional tool in the president's repertoire, Obama is "undermining our ability on criminal justice reform by granting clemency at an alarming rate."

According to ABC News, Defense Secretary Ash Carter was one of the U.S. officials who were also opposed to the White House’s decision to commute Manning’s sentence.

Manning is more than six years into a 35-year sentence at the military prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas for leaking classified government and military documents to the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks. Her sentence is now set to expire May 17.[...]


  1. Maybe Mr. (sic) Manning hacked the President's secrets and is blackmailing him?

  2. Do they still have laws about "traitors"? Do they involve tar and feathers? But seriously, It's what the intelligence community thinks about it, not the Republicans.

  3. Stop calling this pervert Chelsea. Call him by his name, Bradley Manning.

  4. This commutation by Obama is Obama legitimizing WikiLeaks, which is the vehicle Bradley Manning used to publish the government classified secrets that he stole.

  5. Or, maybe the president is steering clear from anything that is demonstrably transphobic. National feelings are more important than national security.

  6. No, no, no. My friend, Moe. WHEN the leak involves tearing down the country, Democrats consider it "good", "healthy", "whistle-blowing", and "promoting openness and transparency in a democracy". WHEN the leak involves helping a man who wants to make America great, it involves dastardly treachery.

    Of course, your point is valid and stands, nevertheless. The Dem's lack the "moral grounds" in this case to criticize after being sandbagged by Mr. Obama.

  7. Wouldn't Womaning be a more appropriate name for him?

  8. The commutation is indeed an outrage, but a bigger outrage is that we are about to inaugurate a President who strongly supports the organization that publishes the work of traitors such as this.

  9. I don't understand the point you are making at all. Whether or not one agrees with the pardon, it is based on an assessment of how heinous Manning's crime was (or wasn't). The choice of the specific outlet he used to publicize the documents is immaterial. According to your reasoning, if Obama pardoned a bank robber who used a Toyota as a getaway car, that would also mean that he is legitimizing those who use Toyotas to commit terror attacks.

  10. How do you figure?

    Mr./Ms. A gave away important secrets which endangered Americans. He was let free by Obama.

    Mr. B was happy that private emails - which did not endanger anyone's life, and just allowed us to see who are candidate really was - is worse???? Huh?

    Strong support is giving in to Assage's demands. Obama gave in to Assage, and commuted Manning's sentence.

  11. Obama legitimized WikiLeaks with his granting this commutation in this WikiLeaks case of Mr. Bradley Manning. Furthermore, most of Assange's defenders, in the rape case against him as well as his publishing WikiLeaks, have been liberals.

  12. Why on earth is it "an outrage"?! The commutee has served six years for a leak of intelligence (note: not espionage), one of those years in solitary confinement (which has apparently occasioned them losing their mind, even suicidally so), and at the time their 35-yr sentence was pronounced, many were aghast at how severe it was. So if the outgoing President, with his security clearance, reviews all the available info, including what was & wasn't leaked, what damage it did, was liable to do, etc. -- all things that we know only piecemeal -- and finds the sentence overly harsh, what exactly is the problem?

    And what's all this nonsense about 'sending the wrong message' that everyone is hyped about? Could anyone really believe that others will think that it's OK to disregard intelligence classification because someone who did served 6 harsh years imprisonment for it and only escaped 29 more by the bare grace of Presidential review?

    I know that McCain signed onto this nonsensical-sounding argument, so perhaps there's a case to be made, but if so it doesn't seem to be making it out of the news channels.


please use either your real name or a pseudonym.