No one disputes that Manning violated the law. She admitted guilt. Act was still justified on ground of informing the public
-
-
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Same goes for liberals who've been relentlessly maligning WikiLeaks for months, but now pretend to herald its most important source.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
do you think military secrets are a bit different than dnc emails? I think many do think that.
-
There is no difference in terms of the validity of WikiLeaks' decision to publish. Conservatives have been defending WL
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Clinton and Manning both put Americans at risk. You don't get that?
-
Manning didn't put anyone at risk. Liar.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
big difference between personal emails and national security!
-
Manning's leak did not compromise national security
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
you're so right, Michael.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If
@wikileaks started publishing things on Trump in the future, would you wager a number of his fans who cheered the exposure -
of the Clintons would quickly turn on wikileaks?
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Just curious as to how you equivocate putting the lives of service members in danger with embarrassing politicians?
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I don't fault Wikileaks. But manning took an oath. As a vet who held a clearance, it's certainly different than a random hacker.
-
Wikileaks isn't the hacker, they just exposed it. Assange isn't a citizen who took an oath.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
No, that's a terrible analogy. Just completely off base on every level.
@mtracey - 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
