Top Ten Things Nobody Ever Said About Bradley Manning

With the creepy little critter about to be sprung from prison by leaders that, in the end, privileged treachery over loyalty, Bradley Manning has been much in the news lately.

People are saying a great many things about him. But what about the things that they are not saying? Without further ado, we present the Top 10 Things Nobody Ever Said About Bradley Manning.


10. “I want to be just like him/her/it when I don’t grow up.”
9. “He’s logical and rationally grounded.”
8. “Ex-private Manning is a keen analyst of military strategy.”
7. “A poster child for loyalty.”
6. “Well done, the clearance adjudicators.”
5. “Bradley Manning: America’s secret weapon.”
4. “A credit to his uniform.”
3. “A great American and an exemplary soldier.”
2. “The textbook case of Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome, from being his unit’s worst intel analyst, miles from any action.”

Bradley Manning as he (?) sees him(?)self.

And, the Number One Thing that Nobody Ever Said About Bradley Manning:

1. “I’d hit that.”

Remember, this is the person that the DC plutocrats found to admire in the US military — a traitor.

60 thoughts on “Top Ten Things Nobody Ever Said About Bradley Manning

  1. Nynemillameetuh

    In another dimension, a different president pardoned Bradley Manning but not Chelsea Manning. Hilarity ensued.

  2. NPB

    I want to express my genuine and sincere appreciation for this website’s coverage and analysis of this Manning farce.

    I’ve been a civilian member of a DoD component, signed a NDA and to think that the Commander-In-Chief would purposefully pardon the traitor who chose to betray such a vast quantity of protected U.S. information and secrets, *on the basis of the traitor’s change in gender identity after their betrayal* is frankly enraging.

    When I was a civvy DoD member, I spent a brief period of time working on a project led by a transgendered individual. I got a letter of commendation from that person on the basis of my efforts. I didn’t do my work any differently than I did it every other day, it just happened to be on a topic that I had some unique skill and experience with.

    I’m astounded that the public LGBT community and the Commander-In-Chief were taken in by the traitor’s actions. I’m sure that a person, who had committed such as massive act of betrayal against the country of their birth, the country that loved and supported them, the country *whose damn uniform* they were wearing, who, once all honor, title, and dignity were (quite rightfully) stripped away, would want to be another person, a person as completely different as possible. That makes sense to me.

    It does not make any sense to me that the Commander-In-Chief and the public LGBT community would embrace a traitor who attempted to identify as transgendered in such a blatant attempt to disassociate himself from his dishonorable and disgusting actions. I can only assume that the public LGBT community values membership in its ranks ahead of the honor of its members, and that the Conmander-In-Chief is a politician who considers the public LGBT community as a more important and relevant constituency than the troops he leads.

    While I understand that the current tradition is to refer to Manning using feminine names and pronouns, I feel that this only rewards and encourages the traitor.

    I’d like to thank this blog again for its take on this disgusting situation.

    1. Hognose Post author

      Note that during the long period in which gays were banned under Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, Manning was openly gay and his entire leadership knew, and no one took action against him. Gays have always been tolerated (if not celebrated) in MI. They seem to be drawn to dress-up-and-pretend, and Manning was sore when he learned that wasn’t his job.

    2. Kirk

      The problem with Manning and his ilk isn’t “teh ghey”, or their aberrant sexual behavior, which, to be frank, is present in a bunch of so-called “straights”, as well. The problem is the set of mental health issues and personality traits that generally accompany those sexual identity and behavioral issues as carry-on baggage.

      Gays can, and have, served honorably. Problem is, separating the sheep from the goats, just as it is with the straights that have waaaaay too much of themselves tied up in their sex lives. You show me anyone who has gone off into the deep end of their sexuality, and I’ll show you a fucking security risk. Dude can’t keep his or her shit in their pants appropriately, hold to a marital vow, or who has really outre sexual tastes? Nine times out of ten, there’s a security breach around them due to things tracing back to that shit. The sober, upright types? Those usually aren’t the ones leaving classified shit out on their desks, or in their cars. Stupid bastards that keep “forgetting” their wedding rings when on TDY? Oh, yeah… They forget a little thing like a wedding vow, what makes you think they will remember to safeguard their classified documents under their care?

      Go dig into the public documentation available about our really major security violators. Come back and tell us how many really strange little things about their sex lives leap out at you. Not every sexually-deviant person is a risk, but its a marker that not enough attention is paid to, in my opinion–And, not because of the blackmail risk either, although that is there.

      1. Quill_&_Blade

        I had this thought, a question actually. I don’t know the guy’s physical strength, or fighting ability; but I wondered if was everybody’s punk to the degree that he went the trans route to be separated from the general population. Like Get_Me_Out_Of_Here at any cost.

        1. Kirk

          I did a lot of reading, back when this came out. Manning, in my opinion, was like this before he joined. There were entire constellations of clues he had issues, including suicide ideation and attempts.

          Guy I knew who was in the unit said there were behavioral and conduct issues galore going on, but nobody wanted to pull his access because of a shortage of qualified personnel to work the SCIF. One of the people there with him had been with Manning through their MOS training, and she supposedly wrote up a six-page sworn statement describing all the shit Manning pulled in training, and which was swept under the carpet by the cadre in the interests of graduating enough people. The way my informant described that statement to me, about the only thing Manning didn’t do while in training was request a pass to go visit the Russian embassy in Mexico city.

          That statement, along with a bunch of shit out of Manning’s counseling packet, supposedly vanished at some point after he was caught, and the 15-6 started. There were a bunch of folks who had an interest in avoiding a lot of the details come out, particularly senior NCOs and the officers who were supposed to be overwatching this kid. Huge, cosmic failure on the part of Security Managers at several levels, most of whom were too lazy to do their fucking jobs, or who their bosses over-tasked and under-supported.

          Manning’s breach was entirely avoidable, and should have been. Unfortunately, they defanged the watchdogs in favor of some nebulous diversity goals, and here we are. God help us–If the universe bends towards justice, all of ghe responsible parties for this failure to prevent what was eminently predictable will answer for it in the afterlife. God knows, nobody will hold them accountable in this one…

  3. Stacy0311

    Put Princess Sparkle out in General Population for the remainder of its sentence. A lot of problems can be resolved for a Snickers and half a pack of smokes.

    1. jim h

      nobody will accuse “guest” of being brave enough to use a name either. the folks posting on this site have all earned the right to be disparaging of a security violation whose mother should’ve swallowed. take your social justice garbage elsewhere.

      ~ another non-decent human being.

    1. Kirk

      If Manning wasn’t mentally ill with a diagnosed case of “gender dysphoria”, he probably wouldn’t have done what he did, either.

      The dipshit should never have been in uniform, never have been granted a clearance, or been put into a position of trust. The people that did that shit should have been right up there in the dock next to him, just the same as the assholes who selected and put into position the stupid cunt that they had running OPM when it was breached by contracting out IT management to a crony Democrat donor…

  4. Cap'n Mike

    Its a sad state of affairs that has us rewarding, celebrating and congratulating mentally ill people.

  5. Kirk

    In a different, far less likely universe, Manning was disqualified from ever serving in the military, and given a referral to the mental health care professionals he needed to be seeing.

    The real problem represented by Manning isn’t him, or his treasonous behavior. The real problem is that he was ever accepted for military service, and then put into a position of trust and kept in it well after he’d demonstrated manifest unsuitability and unfitness for it.

    The people that created that situation, and then lacked the moral courage to do what needed to be done about it are the ones who we need to worry about, from those that gave in to SJW pressure to mainstream the mentally ill into the military, to those that found it just easier to allow his behavior to go by without pulling his access, which they did because they were short on watchstanders.

    Yeah, Manning was and is a traitor. But, the bigger issue, and the one that got swept under ghe carpet, were that there were systemic flaws and a bunch of people asleep at the switch. Hell, even IT bears some blame–The ports and drives that Manning used were supposed to all be disabled, but weren’t, making it childishly easy for him to get stuff off the classified network.

    1. LCPL Martinez USMC


      But why did he have access to Dept of State cables? What’s the reasoning behind giving access to these cables to some Private? What would a private do or need of such cables?

      I agree with the IT and disqualified angles, I’m just trying to figure out why or how some Private can just peruse thru Dept of State cables?

      1. Kirk

        He worked in a SCIF. He had access to the high-side stuff, and nobody was watching him.

        IT is also at fault, here–Those computers are supposed to be port-free, and not enabled on the CD-R drives. The ones in this SCIF weren’t.

        Manning shouldn’t have been where he was, he shouldn’t have been able to do what he did, and the whole thing just indicates a total systemic failure from recruiting to supervision.

        The unit will cry that they were short-handed, under stress, and distracted. Me? Having been a Security Manager for a brigade-size element, I’m just gonna say they should have made the damn time, no matter what it cost them.

  6. g.grass

    on the right universe he would have been stuffed into a cell before it even entered service,then shocked or such until it became a proper citizen.
    this diversity mantra is a cancer.

    1. Kirk

      That isn’t a path we should be on, unless you fancy being put into a cell for your perceived flaws when the other side gets their turn at the wheel. Bad precedent.

      Manning shouldn’t be punished for what he is, he should be punished for what he did. The people who should have been put in cells at his enlistment were the fucking morons that recruited, vetted, and supervised his mentally-unbalanced ass. And, they should have gone in them for their dereliction of duty, in allowing Manning in, plus enabling him to do what he did in that SCIF. An awful lot of people pressed the “easy” button, and we have Manning to show for it.

  7. John Stephens

    Even if it’s not longer confined to a USDB cell it will still be trapped within it’s skull, a far more dismal place than any prison is allowed to be (in America, anyway).

  8. William O. B'Livion

    > 1. “I’d hit that.”

    Oh, I’m sure someone’s hit that. Prolly even come back for seconds.

  9. KevsBlogBrother

    My guess is that Bradley will solve his problems with a drug overdose or something else equally ghastly. He’ll be out of prison, lauded and championed by the usual suspects, but still psychologically messed up.

    1. Kirk

      I think it’s only a matter of time, once he drops out of the limelight. As soon as he’s a nobody again, and his further attention-seeking behavior is no longer being rewarded…?

      Count on either a bullet, an overdose, or something else. As stupid as he is, odds are that it will be something he does to get attention, and which he’ll manage to turn into an actual suicide.

      Y’know, a thought just occurred to me: Could there be such a thing as a “reverse pardon” ? One where Trump just orders a “review” of all these pardons and commutations Obama has done, and not release any of them, pending completion of the investigation? Let us suppose someone were to turn up evidence of corruption, like the Mark Rich bullshit?

      Man, wouldn’t that put the cat in with the canaries…?

      1. DSM

        The sentence was commuted so that factors in all the charges brought against him. He’d have to have completely new charges preferred to avoid double jeopardy.

        1. Kirk

          What one President can commute, another can simply ignore.

          There has to be a reaction to this shit, eventually. Either that, or we’re going to see more and more abuses like this one, and the Mark Rich case.

          We can’t continue to let the sitting President keep arrogating more and more power to his office, or the rule of law is going to die. I think Trump should basically say “These acts were an abuse of power, and the trust of the people in the office of the Presidency… I herewith establish a non-partisan review board to examine the merits of all these individual cases, and will follow their judgments, as well as submitting all future Presidential pardons and clemencies to them during my term in office. Future presidents may do as they wish, but this power has been abused too much to ignore during previous Democratic administrations for this to go unreviewed… “.

          1. Gray

            While your premise has merit, I just do not see it happening.

            The current situation includes a hate-filled and enraged opposition sitting at hair-trigger for any way or means to destroy the PEOTUS (the answer is: Of course not. The question is: Is there anything they would not do to win?), and no real courage within the ranks of the GOP who only reluctantly view Mr. Trump as worthy of support.

            There are already calls (by people like Maxine Waters, who is comedic even just thinking about) for impeachment as soon as possible. Facts do not matter to this ilk (which I am sure you know). The reality is that it is going to be very difficult to keep the republicans standing in support. They consider themselves too nice to stand and fight, and they lack the spine for it.

          2. DSM

            “I herewith establish a non-partisan review board to examine the merits of all these individual cases…”

            That’s the Office of the Pardon Attorney I believe. There are specific rules for submitting for a Presidential pardon, but, as you say, the President may pardon any crime under his jurisdiction at any time.

        1. Kirk

          It would be interesting to see it adjudicated, to be quite honest. I don’t think that the language supports what Obama is doing, nor do I think that the power as laid out in the Constitution was meant to be abused in this manner.

          The Obama administration has been a study in executive overreach; it would be nice to see that reeled in, instead of extended. I don’t think we’re going to see Trump do that, but it’s a nice fantasy.

          That comment about our government only being fit for moral men is a true and telling one; Obama is neither moral nor fit for office as President. That has been clear with every single action and appointment this creature has made in the course of his office; his decision to take up residency in the capital, and likely attempt to make himself a focus for revanchist efforts is one I would strongly suggest needs to be countered, or we’re just going to see more of this shit out of the moral cripples who we keep electing. Nemesis must eventually answer Hubris, or we’re going to wind up with Caesar Augustus on the Potomac.

        2. JAFO

          Bush reversed one in 2008 the day after it had been announced, saying that there was new information. The actual pardon document had not been signed or delivered.

          Grant is supposed to have directed that some pardons made by his predecessor not be delivered, but I’m not sure this is accurate,

          I’m not aware of any case where a pardon was actually delivered and subsequently revoked.

  10. SAM

    I bet that “She” will do the rounds on TV for a lot of money and two years after that all stops “she” will not be around but Bradley Manning will be back, may be under a different name.

  11. staghounds

    Like it or not, using the pardon power is entirely at the whim of the President. A pardon is effective when the president signs it, there’s no review or unpardoning.

    It would be perfectly constitutional for a President to pardon every single person ever convicted of a federal crime, and there’s nothing anyone could do about it. Even if he pardoned in exchange for a bribe, it would still be valid.

    (I’ve suggested that President Trump pardon every federal marijuana conviction as a first act. The country doesn’t want it to be a federal crime anymore, it’s going to happen eventually, it would weaken government power, and it would confound the absolute hell out of his opponents.)

    1. Kirk

      The untrammeled authority to pardon crime is something that should never have been included in the presidential purview, in the first place. Too much potential for abuse, when assholes like Obama are elected.

      There should be a power to pardon, for truly big-ticket things that are nationally divisive. This penne-ante bullshit, with all these drug dealers and so forth? Nope, nuh-uh, no.

      The fact that he could issue such a blanket pardon of every criminal in the federal penitentiary system is insane; these people were convicted by duly appointed legal authorities, and for the President to willy-nilly issue mass pardons and commutations? Bullshit–There’s no way that they could have given these enough scrutiny to ensure that they were justified. He’s doing this for the “feels”, and I hope one of the released criminals winds up attacking someone he’s related to and cares about, rather than a random stranger.

      1. staghounds

        Good idea or not, it’s there and nothing but constitutional amendment will alter it. Gripe to Charles Pinckney and James Madison.

        1. Kirk

          A power abused and not used responsibly will inevitably lead to that power evaporating–Either when the system supporting it crashes, or when the rational restrain it.

          It may be time for a constitutional amendment on the issue, to tell the truth.

          But, like most of Obama’s overreaches, I don’t see a particular reason why another President couldn’t simply reverse them by executive diktat–What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

          1. staghounds

            The reason is that a pardon is a specific act of grace that is final when it is issued. Like a gift- if I give you a cow from my herd, and then sell the farm, the buyer of the farm can’t take the cow back.

            It’s not an unconviction, not a finding that someone isn’t guilty. Not a command or a regulation to do or not do something. Not subject to any review.

            Executive orders are entirely different things, executing the laws.

      2. John M.

        So. The judiciary used to be an extension of the Crown, as justice belonged to the sovereign. (There’s a reason why we use the same word for the circus surrounding the king as we do for the places where justice is administered: court.) As befitting the sovereign to whom justice belonged, the sovereign could override the rulings of his servants, the judges and commute or pardon as he saw fit.

        When the framers set up our Montesqueuvian separation-of-powers business, they left that power with the executive, even though the judges no longer work for the executive.

        Even though our framers were largely Leftists, I don’t think they foresaw a time when the executive would be such a thoroughgoing Leftist that he’d be pardoning ordinary street criminals just because they were of the correct constituency or so that they’d create problems for his political opponents.

        A king, of course, has no incentive to pardon such people and reserved the pardon for exceptional cases where rigorous application of the law would have been less just or sensible than a simple commutation or pardon. But then, kings usually have incentives to be seen as reliable administrators of justice rather than as simple mechanisms for the delivery of spoils. They also like order in their kingdoms, rather than the disorder preferred by the Left.

        So here we are.

        -John M.

        1. Kirk

          Disorder abets their consistent attempts to aggrandize themselves and their party; it is far past time for there to be a counter-reaction, else we face the prospect of continued abuses and more loss of the established mores that limited these creatures in the past.

          I don’t even think FDR did some of this crap; he at least, paid attention to the necessity to work through Congress to enact much of his programs.

  12. Tom Stone

    Rachel Maddow would “Hit that”, so would Bill Clinton after two drinks.
    As far as making plans for the future I wouldn’t recommend that Manning buy any green bananas.

    1. John M.

      Rachel Maddow might be a little surprised what she got hit with if she were to try to “hit that.” Many, many “transgender” men maintain an active interest in women and seek to have “lesbian” relationships with them. Many retain intact wedding tackle. (I don’t know if Mr. Manning has done so, nor do I care to know. But the abnormality here runs very, very deep.)

      -John M.

  13. Kirk

    Here’s a link to a blog post detailing Manning’s behavior during Basic, as described by someone who went through it with him.

    Interesting, and fully consonant with everything I heard about this shitbag through the grapevine.

    Complete, and utter failure of the recruiting, training, and quality management system. He never should have made it into the Army, or been graduated from Basic.

    1. Tennessee Budd

      Interesting read, but bloody annoying. Even if one chooses to call “Chelsea” by the pronoun “she” (which I don’t, any more than I would call my cat “my trusty steed”), he was neither “she” nor “Chelsea” at the time; he was Recruit Bradley Manning. The whole “Chelsea” thing came later. If it’s going to be retroactive, then Bruce Jenner ought to give back his medals, because he won them in men’s events.

  14. Kirk


    Interesting and pertinent link in a post that’s in moderation; comes from a guy who was in Manning’s initial BCT company…

    Ain’t much of a surprise he was a recycle.

  15. Sommerbiwak

    Reading Kirk’s posts about Manning’s history of (mis)conducts it really is no wonder he spilled secrets.

    And as other have said: Who was responsible for keeping he/she/it in the US Army and not kicking him/her/it out with a running start? Such a crack pot leaks in more than one way. THAT is the scandal nobody talks about. Manning is a symptom of a rotten army giving the wrong incentives to commanders and makes them cover up such shit to fill slots. Instead of truth fully reporting, that, sorry sir, for this very specialised MOS we cannot find and train enough talent and sending substandard soldiers is bad for the army.

    1. Hognose Post author

      Yep. Something we learned long ago in SOF: “I’d rather go down the river with five studs than with fifty shitheads.” — Col. Charles Beckwith. It’s very rare for an ODA to be at full strength. But most of the Army is more concerned that the slot be filled than what it is with filled with.

      A half-strength infantry company of solid, bonded volunteers has more combat power than a full battalion of miserable, backbiting draftees or joined-for-the-wrong-reason losers like Manning.

    2. Kirk

      That’s precisely the point, or one of them, that I’ve been trying to make.

      In a sense, I don’t fault Manning for what he did. Princess Sparkleponies gonna do Princess Sparklepony shit, ya know? The people who let him/her/it into my fucking Army, didn’t hold him/her/it responsible or accountable for his/her/its conduct?

      They should have gotten a bullet in the back of the neck, right beside Manning. All of them. I’m getting corroboration about what I’ve been saying about Manning in AIT, and its even worse than I thought. Not only was he acting out then, there were a raft of policy-changing security breaches they traced back to him, and which the cadre wrote off as being inadvertent.

      More I’m hearing, the more I’m wondering about whether or not Manning wasn’t another case of a Bowe Bergdahl or that fruity asian officer that joined to “make statements” from the beginning.

  16. LCPL Martinez USMC

    I’ve always wondered how some Private in the Army got Dept of State cables, I can understand higher ups, maybe specific S-2 units, but how did Bradley Manning get access to these w/ out some sort of supervisory oversight?

    I’ve Googled, and wiki’ed, to no avail, but I did learn about (Manning’s defense) LOL! now I understand why some Marines are the way they are, LOL! Hahahahahahaha…

    I hope this no NEED to KNOW policy has been fixed.

    1. Hognose Post author

      Martinez, “no need-to-know policy” was exactly what it was. The theory was giving analysts the access to the absolute maximum quantity of information might allow them to make connective leaps. This vastly overestimated the abilities of the average armed forces all-source-analyst, and Manning was, of course, well below average in just about everything except psychopathology.

      1. LCPL Martinez USMC

        I hope it’s been fixed, I agree with you , Hognose (and Kirk), this is systemic mainly , but Manning should ‘ve received the full brunt of this… since Assange changed his mind vis-a-vis the extradition, can’t Obama also change his mind? LOL! he’s got til tomorrow still, no?

        But seriously though,
        I’m sure these first term “analysts” weren’t privvy to say CIA or NSA, or FBI (don’t really know if they have cables), etc. BUT why Dept of State cables?

        OR was the problem also that Dept of State wasn’t sanitizing their own cables and just dumped it as-is, and shared to everyone with a Secret clearance?

        1. Kirk

          Wasn’t “everyone with a Secret clearance”. Manning worked in a SCIF, a Secure Compartmented Information Facility, inside the D-Main. Why they had what he got accessible, I don’t know–Most of what I had access to over on SIPR was kinda-sorta “Why the blue fuck is this classified?”, like all the Jane’s databases.

          Why some of it was there, though? Pure convenience. I presume that was why the geniuses connected up the State Department stuff to what Manning had, as well. How much real intel work that twerp was doing, I don’t know, but I’m pretty sure that he wasn’t doing a hell of a lot besides filling an airspace gap between chair and the screen.

          As I’ve said, ad nauseum, the whole thing is just symptomatic of failure in the Obama era. Manning should have never, ever been where he was, and a whole lot of people had to actively fuck up to make that happen.

  17. Steve M.

    Manning may find that he is living in the ultimate general population. In prison, you worry about the guy within arms reach. Outside of prison, you need to worry about everybody. I don’t see old age taking him out. Reaping and sowing is still a fact of life.

    Can we get Kirk to write a self help column?

Comments are closed.