The quasi-Stalinist American state takes aim (again) — at Chelsea Manning

11 March 2019

One of the eye-opening aspects of law school was . . .

. . . learning that the United States is not actually a free place.

Draconian aspects of the British King's Court were dragged across the water into the new United States' pretended liberty-supporting legal structure.

As an example — consider Chelsea Manning's current situation

The Associated Press indicated that:

Former Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning [see here], who served years in prison for leaking one of the largest troves of classified documents in U.S. history, was sent to jail Friday for refusing to testify before a grand jury investigating WikiLeaks.

U.S. District Judge Claude Hilton ordered Manning to jail for civil contempt of court after a brief hearing in federal court in Alexandria in which Manning confirmed she has no intention of testifying.

Manning has said she objects to the secrecy of the grand jury process and already revealed everything she knows at her court-martial.

“Specific details about Ms. Manning’s confinement will not be made public due to security and privacy concerns,” Alexandria Sheriff Dana Lawhorne said in a statement.

Why should we care, Pete?

Consider Manning and her attorneys' reasoning:

[Manning:]

Imprisoning me for my refusal to answer questions only subjects me to additional punishment for my repeatedly-stated ethical objections to the grand jury system.

The grand jury’s questions pertained to disclosures from nine years ago, and took place six years after an in-depth computer forensics case, in which I testified for almost a full day about these events.

I stand by my previous public testimony. I will not participate in a secret process that I morally object to, particularly one that has been historically used to entrap and persecute activists for protected political speech.

[Manning's attorneys:]

Due to their secretive nature and limitless subpoena power, the government has utilized grand jury processes as tools for garnering information about movements by questioning witnesses behind closed doors.

Since testimony before grand juries is secret, grand juries can create fear by suggesting that some members of a political community may be secretly cooperating with the government.

In this way, grand juries can seed suspicion and fear in activist communities.

Notice two aspects

First, the US government can make y'all talk, regardless of your alleged American liberty or your ethics.

Second, "details" of Chelsea Manning's imprisonment will be kept secret.

This evidently, so that the government can coerce her (kindly or unkindly) at its leisure.

Much like the US Army did, before and during her post-court martial imprisonment. See here and here.

We can legitimately conclude that

In these United States:

government can imprison you for not rat-finking on purely alleged criminal conspirators

and

its deep state can pseudo or real-torture you, until you do

and

its executive branch easily persuades America's subservient judiciary that it must conceal these unpleasantnesses under cloaks of (national security) secrecy.

Hmmm

How this categorically differs from the reasoning that led to the creation of Soviet Union's Lubyanka prison, beats me.

Perhaps we in the United States deprive allegedly recalcitrant people of their freedom and wellbeing in "kinder, gentler" ways than the Soviets and Nazis did.

Sort of like substituting waterboarding for fingernail pulling.

Or randomly sticking "never heard of him" people into Guantanamo Bay prison, to molder there within trial and for indefinitely infinite periods.

In other words

Rather than gathering real and independent proof of wrong-doing, American government can imprison anyone it wants for refusing to testify against the American deep state's concocted targets.

The extortion process goes on, essentially as long as government wants it to.

In Chelsea Manning's case, hypothetically, all government will have to do, when the current grand jury expires and Manning gets out of jail, is to convene a new one and drag Manning back into custody.

The moral? — How does the Great American Plutocracy substantially differ from a proto-totalitarian state?

I wonder. If you complacently do not, just wait until the deep state snatches you up for some mostly made-up reason.

I see no foundational difference between:

(i) the US forcing Chelsea Manning to speak against her wishes

and

(ii) Chairman Mao's "little red book" (mandatory squeal-against-your-neighbor) parade.

None.

Welcome to where we are.

PeteFree.com

The quasi-Stalinist American state takes aim (again) — at Chelsea Manning