The defense for Pfc. Bradley Manning will continue to call witnesses today, as they put on their case in the sentencing phase of Manning’s trial.
|By: Kevin Gosztola Tuesday August 13, 2013 7:20 am|
|By: Norman Solomon Tuesday July 30, 2013 7:00 pm|
The sun rose with a moral verdict on Bradley Manning well before the military judge could proclaim his guilt. The human verdict would necessarily clash with the proclamation from the judicial bench.
In lockstep with administrators of the nation’s war services, judgment day arrived on Tuesday to exact official retribution. After unforgivable actions, the defendant’s culpability weighed heavy.
|By: Anti-Capitalist Meetup Sunday July 28, 2013 5:10 pm|
Wired.com details that not-very-surprising fact that those congressional representatives who received the largest political donations from defense contractors voted last week, 217 to 205, to oppose cuts to NSA’s phone-spying dragnet budget. Those who opposed the cuts, and thus the “Amash amendment” received 122% more defense contractor funds than those who voted against it, with one Democratic exception of Representative Dennis Moran of Virginia.
|By: Kevin Gosztola Friday July 19, 2013 2:15 pm|
Military prosecutors in the trial of Pfc. Bradley Manning, the soldier on trial for disclosing US government information to WikiLeaks, took their case to a level it had not previously gone: they explicitly questioned Manning’s loyalty to America when he was in the military to suggest that this played some role in his decision to disclose classified information without authorization.
|By: Kevin Gosztola Friday July 19, 2013 1:20 pm|
Today the prosecution continues with its rebuttal with Jihrieah Showman on the stand. Showman was Manning’s former supervisor and will be on the stand to make statements about Manning’s loyalty to America. A clip of Showman from the “We Steal Secrets” documentary will be shown in court after the prosecutors review it.
|By: Kevin Gosztola Thursday July 18, 2013 2:00 pm|
The judge has denied the defense motions for a finding of “not guilty” on the “aiding the enemy” charge and the charges alleging Manning exceeded authorized access on his computer. What is important to note about this ruling is that she was to consider all evidence presented to her in a “light most favorable to the prosecution.”
|By: Kevin Gosztola Monday July 15, 2013 6:30 pm|
The defense in the military trial against Pfc. Bradley Manning at Fort Meade in Maryland argued multiple motions directing the judge to find Manning not guilty of committing greater offenses.
Four motions were filed challenging charges that allege Manning “exceeded authorized access” on his computer, stole, purloined or knowingly converted databases containing United States government information and that he “without proper authority, knowingly give intelligence to the enemy, through indirect means” and “aided the enemy.”
|By: Kevin Gosztola Monday July 15, 2013 4:00 pm|
Both the government and the defense have rested in the trial of Pfc. Bradley Manning, who is being prosecuted for disclosing United States government information to WikiLeaks. But, before the trial proceeds onward to a ruling by the judge on what offenses Manning is guilty of committing, the judge must rule on motions requesting a finding of “not guilty” for seven of the offenses Manning is charged with committing.
|By: Kevin Gosztola Tuesday July 9, 2013 3:45 pm|
During the first day of the defense’s case in the trial of Pfc. Bradley Manning, his defense moved for a finding of “not guilty” on the charge of “aiding the enemy.”
Manning is charged with committing multiple offenses that relate to releasing United States government information to WikiLeaks. The offenses include violations of the Espionage Act, a federal statute prohibiting the embezzlement of government property and violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
|By: Kevin Gosztola Tuesday July 9, 2013 12:43 pm|
David Coombs of the defense argued that if the government had not taken steps to secure or protect information—particularly the detainee assessment briefs, which contain information that is publicly available—the fact that information is public would be relevant to whether it was “closely held.”
By “closely held,” that means whether the government actually took steps to prevent the information from being disclosed or to respond to the information’s release when it did become public to protect individuals, etc.