Chelsea Manning May Have Given False Testimony in WikiLeaks Trial, Say Prosecutors

[DonViejo]

Source: The Daily Beast



Newly unsealed court filing shows prosecutors have doubts over Manning’s testimony about leaking classified material to WikiLeaks.

Kevin Poulsen
03.21.19 4:34 AM ET

Federal prosecutors believe that Chelsea Manning may have given “false or mistaken” testimony during her 2013 court-martial for leaking classified material to WikiLeaks, Manning’s attorney disclosed in a newly unsealed court filing.

Manning has been in jail since March 3, when a federal judge found her in contempt for refusing to testify in front of the Alexandria, Virginia, grand jury investigating WikiLeaks. The grand jury probe began in 2010, when the secret-spilling website began dumping hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables and U.S. Army field reports Manning leaked to Julian Assange during a deployment to Iraq.

At her court-martial in 2013, Manning gave a lengthy statement detailing her motives and accepting personal responsibility for the leaks. Now prosecutors are claiming they have new information that some of her testimony was inaccurate, according to Manning’s lawyer, who thinks someone has been spying on her client.

“The concern here is that the subpoena as a whole is the product of unlawful—and possibly misunderstood—electronic surveillance,” attorney Moira Meltzer-Cohen wrote in a March 1 motion to block the subpoena that was unsealed Wednesday.


Read more: https://www.thedailybeast.com/chelsea-manning-may-have-given-false-testimony-in-wikileaks-trial-say-prosecutors?ref=home

[Blue_Tires]

1. Greenwald and Assange were unavailable for comment

[ehrnst]

4. ....

[FreepFryer]

2. Throw away the key. She's no friend of the United States. (n/t)

[bitterross]

3. Yes she is. She's a whistle-blower.

She leaked information that directly contradicted the BS spin the Bush-Cheney administration was throwing out there.

Just because she leaked it to wikileaks is no reason to hate on her. I don't recall anyone around here having an issue with it at the time. It seems a bit hypocritical to have an issue with it now just because wikileaks supported Trump.

[leftynyc]

6. Were you here at the time?

Because many of us had a problem with her taking it upon herself to divulge national security secrets.

[FarPoint]

8. I support the question.

😎

[LiberalArkie]

15. A lot of people also had a big problem with those who divulged info on Ma Lai.

[leftynyc]

17. It was thoroughly irresponsible to

turn them over to wikileaks who let's remember is tied to the russians. She could have given it to the NY Times, The Wash Post, The Wall Street Journal. I don't care what happens to her.

[JonLP24]

21. I was here and I didn't have a problem with the information being released

I was more upset at the war crimes like the "collateral murder" and CIA Paramilitary killing civilians.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2010/jul/25/afghanistan-civilian-deaths-rules-engagement

In hindsight she leaked to the wrong organization but back then Wikileaks reputation was much better before they worked with Roger Stone and the Russians.

[OnlinePoker]

7. It was released during the latter half of Obama's first term

It also included a lot of info that happened during Obama's time as CiC.

[hack89]

10. Whistle-blower has a specific legal definition

she did not follow the law regarding whistle-blowing. That is what got her in trouble in the first place.

[bitterross]

20. Thanks for the GOP take on it. /nt

[hack89]

24. No. That is the legal take on it

You can’t be but in prison for obeying the law. Are you aware what the law says?

[cab67]

14. No, she isn't.

However noble her motivations might have been, turning the stuff over to WikiLeaks was unambiguously the least responsible thing she could have done. There are better ways of getting this stuff out - turning it over to a reputable journalist, for example.

[SkyDaddy7]

18. I had problems with how she did it...

I got ran off almost every post made about it at the time. I'm all about whistle blowing but not at the expense of putting the lives at risk of Americans &/or the people already putting their lives at risk working for America because people like Assange & Greenwald are more interested in their own egos. Pathetic!

[JonLP24]

22. I served in Iraq I have no problem with what Manning released

She should have handed it over to a better news organization but hindsight is 20/20.

[leftynyc]

26. You and me both

Juries went against me right and left about posts concerning both manning and that fucker greenwald. Frankly, I feel vindicated.

[bitterross]

5. Seems like prosecutors are unhappy with Obama's communting her sentence

Sounds like the prosecutors are going back for a second round because they're angry Obama commuted her sentence. That's just wrong.

[radical noodle]

11. I think Obama did it out of kindness

but I'm not sure he did the right thing in this case.

[okaawhatever]

25. There is so much new info about Wikileaks re: the Russians, I doubt this has anything to do with

prosecutors revenge.

[comradebillyboy]

9. Manning is a special sort of stupid.

[jalan48]

12. Daniel Ellsburg calls Mannning an American hero.

Noted whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg praised Manning. “Chelsea Manning is in jail again, this time for resisting a grand jury system whose secrecy and lack of witness rights makes it prone to frequent abuse,” Ellsberg told Truthout. “She is also resisting its current abuse, as it is used to attack freedom of the press by pursuing criminal charges for publication of the very war crimes and corruption she courageously revealed to WikiLeaks nine years ago.”

“Manning knowingly risked her freedom then for truth-telling and actually suffered seven-and-a-half years in prison. I regard her as an American hero, and I admire her for what she is doing, risking and enduring right now,” Ellsberg said.

https://truthout.org/articles/daniel-ellsberg-calls-chelsea-manning-an-american-hero/

[JonLP24]

27. I agree with Daniel Ellsburg

[Ford_Prefect]

13. I take it that no one now recalls the significance or the content released?

The documents covered events from 2004 to 2009 in the Iraq and Afghan wars which showed actions by US forces in a raw and unflattering light.

One particular aspect was the number of civilian casualties and how often they had occurred. Another was the perspective it gave to the overall failure of the Afghan campaign.

Prior to this point Congress and the American people were largely unaware of the truth on the ground about either war.

[JonLP24]

23. +1

[still_one]

16. I have no sympathy for her. Obama gave her an opportunity, and she threw it away

[soryang]

19. what happened to the speedy trial issue on appeal?

the trial lawyer at courts-martial appeared to have made a decent record on delays. I just read the appellate decision and it apparently wasn't raised. Did I miss something?