Is there a hidden logic behind Obama’s freeing Chelsea Manning?
A lot of people are puzzled over the motives behind President Obama freeing Chelsea Manning soon by commuting his sentence. Some posit that he is ingratiating himself with the sexual left. Others darkly suspect that he intends to hobble the ability of the United States to conduct espionage, signaling to other potential traitors that they can be pardoned by a future progressive president.
Almost everyone agrees that this act will influence his legacy, as the Marc Rich pardon has helped define the Clinton legacy.
But what if there is a plan that is not immediately obvious to most observers?
Jack Armstrong just made a brilliant observation supporting the notion that something is up: Donald Trump has not yet tweeted about the subject. He adds:
Don’t forget that Julian Assange has agreed to come back to the US and face trial if Manning were freed.
Perhaps the Trump team has determined that Assange is sincere and wants to come back and face a public trial, making transparency a cause for the jury to weigh. Assange may be willing to face a prison term for the opportunity to make his trial a showcase, a historic case that ignites passion around the world – especially if the precedent exists of progressive presidents pardoning leakers.
This would hobble the intelligence-gathering and security operations of the Trump administration.
And irony of ironies, Obama gets the image of Mr. Transparency for his role in freeing Manning despite his broken promise to have the “most transparent administration in the history of America.”