5 votes

Not Much Sympathy from Rand Paul on Bradley Manning Verdict

There's terrible news out about Rand Paul and comments he has made about Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden.

At a Cato University event, Rand stated that there need to be some laws that protect certain secrets and that Manning put many lives at risk by releasing millions of pages “willy-nilly,” reports DL Magazine.

“There do have to be laws to protect some secrets. I think if you’ve got the, you know, the plans on how to make a nuclear bomb that is a state secret. If you give that to the enemy, that is being treasonous,” said Rand, “Even if you reveal it, you just have to have laws against that. What Manning did was just willy-nilly, just released millions of pages of things and I think some people have said there is potentially some harm from that. You know individual agents that could have been killed or put at risk from this. So there is a problem with that. So I just can’t support that.”


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Maybe he didn't provide it in

Maybe he didn't provide it in his post, but he has more reason to support Rand than you have not to. You are just as bad, completely without evidence just stating your arbitrary viewpoint. Your claim is ridiculous. In fact I would argue that if his last name weren't Paul we would have been much quicker to embrace him. The obvious reality is that he is lockstep with his father on 99% of all issues, and only when he differs do we even hear about it around here.

Freedom in our lifetime! - fiol.us

I'm a lot less concerned with

I'm a lot less concerned with the percentage of items they disagree on than the specifics of what they disagree on.

We cannot expect Rand to be Ron all the time

I find this disappointing and disagree with Rand on this issue. However, this is very small in the grand scheme of things. We have to remember everything else Rand stands for. Let’s not let this get in the way of the bigger picture.

Just a zebra showing his

Just a zebra showing his stripes.

I find this...

very disappointing.

When you tap dance to

When you tap dance to different tunes at the same time you're going to get hoof and mouth disease.I'm very disappointed in the tragic way the Ron Paul legacy is being destroyed. Rather than let Ron Paul rise or fall from the floor of the convention in a champion effort followed by millions of supporters...only to increase in numbers with a heroic loss Rand screwed us all. His ambition is calculatingly obvious.

If he really said this

Then it contradicts everything he had stated before and he has lost my vote.

True colors showing.... Rand

True colors showing.... Rand is slowly coming out as a neocon...

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

Reagan 2.0

Reagan 2.0

Oh yeah, sure, he's "playing the game." But the game corrupts.

Simple Facts and Plain Arguments
A common sense take on politics and current events.


Why did he have to stick his

Why did he have to stick his nose in it at all? Wouldn't it have made more sense (over the last few years) to comment negatively about something like Bloomy's stop & frisk?


This is simply craven, and very much causes Rand Paul to be lowered in my esteem.

The Insomniac Libertarian

Rand Paul - the Great Compromiser II

The spirit of Henry Clay is very much alive in the US Senate.

Rand Paul mentioned at a speech at Cato yesterday that he "doesn't have a lot of sympathy" for Bradley Manning.

Really Rand?

The same Bradley Manning who exposed war crimes? War crimes that the government you work for, has left unpunished to this day?

The same Bradley Manning who was tortured for bringing this truth to light?

The same Bradley Manning who's been railroaded in a political kangaroo court sham of justice?

A few years ago Rand gave a speech about compromise. He mentioned that he sat at the same desk as the "great compromiser" (and political opportunist) Henry Clay.

Rand's speech is a warning of the dangers of compromising principle to political expediency.

He compares Henry Clay's compromise of the issue of slavery, with the heroic stand made by the abolitionists at the time.

He concludes:
"As long as I sit at Henry Clay’s desk, I will remember his lifelong desire to forge agreement, but I will also keep close to my heart the principled stand of his cousin, Cassius Clay, who refused to forsake the life of any human simply to find agreement."

I'm sure Bradley Manning, rotting in prison, will be happy to know that Rand Paul, in his drive to become "The Great, Glorious Libertarian Savior" will be keeping Bradley's principled stand "close to his heart."

I don't see the point of getting worked up--

it is a personal choice whether or not to invest hope in Rand Paul.

I am not investing in anyone anymore--

just trying to stay informed, live as close to liberty as possible--

and survive.

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

it is what it is. Not unexpected from Rand.

As larken says. Its great everyone has made the first step to minarchism. Keep applying the non aggression and non intervention principals to everything and you will get there.

Larkin is a hypocrit

Everyone who runs for an office, is involved in politics, is a Statist on some level. What I don't understand is why Larken and anarchist care. FREE YOURSELF.

You're going to get off the political bus.. GO! But this CAMPAIGN against "Statist, which Ron Paul is a stateist, because Ron Paul says, "Leave some laws, like marijuana, up to the states.."

Why not apply your non-intervention principle to your own action and stop interveening in politics?

Two things: 1. I am

Two things:

1. I am disappointed that Rand did not mention that there has been no reported deaths or injuries do to Manning’s leak.

2. Where does Rand say "he has no sympathy" for Manning? To me it reads that he is more against the leaking of classified secrets for purposes other than whistle blowing and that he doesn’t agree with the way Manning went about it. He doesn't attack Manning or Snowden.

I like Rand, I do, but statements like this after he has been so good at criticizing the NSA really would confuse potential libertarian-ish voters.

Denise B's picture

I have a question for you...

Do you personally believe that there should be NO laws protecting sensitive information from within our national defense agencies? Is it your position that any individual from any of these agencies should be free to release any documents to the general public, or even to our enemies without fear of repercussion?

Just to clarify, if you state that that is your position, then what would keep any individual from ever releasing any information that they chose to, to whomever they chose to? What about within the military itself, at a time of war? Should members of the military be free to share classified information with anyone they chose to at their own discretion? What would keep an individual with harmful intent from getting a job at such an agency with the sole intent of sabotaging it by releasing whatever information he chose to, if no such laws against it existed?

And if that is not your position, than you in essence agree with what Rand was saying. He chose his words carefully, as usual, and as far as his stance that there does need to be some laws restricting how classified information can be used, he is in fact correct. I am about as pro-liberty as a person can be, and yet I still get that. I also get that he is positioning himself for a potential run at the presidency and these questions are put to him with the sole intent to discredit him and us against him, and I am glad that he is smart enough to answer them very carefully. Even if he agrees with his dad's stance (which I would guess that he does), he is wise enough at this point to not respond in the same manner as his dad so that he actually has the chance to become President.

All these posts trying to denigrate Rand are getting really tired. The only negative thing I think that is worthy of alarm and posting would be concerning whether or not he violates his oath of office. To date, I haven't seen that happen yet, so give the guy a break and stop looking for anything you can to discredit him.

I'm with Ron...

Ron Paul has stated over and over that the government should have no secrets. No secrets means no secrets. We do not have enemies. The United States "government" has enemies, and we are among them.

We should not have a standing army/military, much less one that hides its evil deeds behind a veil of secrecy. We have no national defense agencies and never have had them. We have government defense agencies starting with the continental army which are dedicated to offense and are the greatest threat to our liberty.

The key question is really: Do you believe in liberty? If so, then what Ron Paul says will appeal to you, and when Rand Paul says:

"I have a great deal of respect for the government. I am part of the government."

Then you will know what side he is on.

So yes, my position is somewhat as you describe. Government has no sensitive information...only secret information that leads to more and more evil doing.

Denise B's picture

I am well

versed with Ron Paul and his stances and have supported him for a very long time. I get what you are saying, but we are not dealing with things the way they should be, we are dealing with them the way that they actually are. I can pretty much guarantee you that if Ron Paul was running for president again he would not have made the statement that he did. Any political figure that comes out in public support of Bradley Manning is committing political suicide. Ron Paul can openly call Bradley Manning a hero because he is speaking as a private citizen, but what about when he was in office or running for office? We all know that 911 was an inside job, but Ron wouldn't touch that one with a 10' pole (and I don't blame him). Was that because he was a coward and didn't love liberty or because he knew that if he did it would be the end of his political career?

Politics has become a very dirty game and the enemy holds all of the cards because they control the media and therefore public perception. Like it or not, if we are going to have a seat at the table at all at this point, it is necessary to know which battles to fight and which hills are worth dying on. What do you think Rand Paul should have said about Bradley Manning? Honestly, I would like to hear your response. Because if you think he should have said exactly what his father said than you must realize that in doing so he would have lost any chance of ever being elected president, and quite possibly lost his Senate seat as well. That would have been great for the liberty movement because then we would have no one in the senate who cares a rats butt about their oath of office. How does that help the liberty movement?

What about Justin Amash? Has he come out and openly supported Bradley Manning and called him a hero and asked that he be pardoned? What about any public official? Which one did that, because I haven't heard about it yet. The Liberty's Movements primary litmus test for our elected officials should be whether or not they obey the Constitution. To this point, Rand has done that and I just for the life of me do not understand why so many people that seem to care about liberty in this country don't get that that is the primary thing we should be concerned about when judging a political candidate.

Denise B's picture

And I would also

like to add that arguing amongst ourselves about whether or not Rand should publicly support Bradley Manning is exactly what TPTB would love for us to be doing. Their tactics are working just fine, because instead of standing united supporting candidates that actually keep their oath's of office, as we should be, we're too busy arguing with each other about who amongst the liberty candidates (as few as they are) is the most "pure" and who's better than who, who said this and why did he say that, blah, blah, blah..... Let's not forget that the sole purpose of our elected officials is to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution. It's really very simple. Keep your oath of office, and you get my vote. Don't and you won't. Everything else just serves to be a distraction and division which serves no one but the enemy.


You nail it every time.


2014 Liberty Candidate Thread: http://www.dailypaul.com/287246/2014-liberty-candidate-thread

2016 Potential Presidential Candidates: http://alturl.com/mt7tq

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

Denise - i agree - some things should be classified

However, there is a huge moral difference between keeping something classified to maintain an advantage - such as technology - or to maintain secrecy about a future movement - I would not want the world knowing when we pull our subs into Groton for a little tune up - seems it would be tempting for some - and classifying material to keep people in the dark - or worse - to cover up lies(as is the case with the infamous helicopter video).

Lets also take a step back for a minute though and ask some tough questions. Bradley Manning was a horrible soldier from day one in the military. He was "dropped" in basic and had to start over - that is a real bad start to a military career. He had issues all along - yet - somehow - they allow this misfit, "unsat" soldier to gain top security clearance. That should be the first sign something is horribly wrong.

Seems to me if it is so important - you should probably not let the cannon fodder(which is what an unsat drop in boot camp used to be referred to) have access to it - this guy really should have topped out at a cook - not in intelligence.
That's not to say I think what he did was wrong - I am glad he did it. However, the other side is the writing on the wall - our military is in such a poor state that some piss poor excuse for a soldier, clearly emotionally troubled and barely able to deal with the stress of Boy Scout boot camp in the Army was given access to hordes of top secret data - and had so little oversight that he was actually able to steal it - and was only caught because of his instability and his own admission.

As for Rand - I think he will probably wish for clarification. When he says he has little sympathy - that also implies he has no issue with the abusive treatment following his arrest - and THAT I do have an issue with- because no other single issue portrays the downfall of our society more than the acceptance of torture in our current culture. Otherwise- whatever - in my opinion Rand is the last best hope - perfect or otherwise - anybody else wins the presidency and I will probably look to leave this country.

Denise B's picture

I also am

glad that Mr. Manning had the courage to step forward and do what he did and he is a hero in my book because he had to know that doing so was going to destroy the rest of his life, and possibly end it and that takes an incredible amount of courage to do what he did. It is my opinion; however, that Rand's statement concerning his lack of sympathy for him was specific to the fact that he was being prosecuted for breaking the law and doing so in a manner which had the potential to harm other individuals, and I think he clarified that by further commenting that he could have done what he did in a much more preferable manner than just "willy nilly" throwing a mountain of classified paperwork out there for anyone to see and use. I truly do not believe that Rand Paul does or would support torture of anyone for any reason because, as you referenced, that is the worst possible violation of a human being's rights and Rand has shown over and over again that he is a strong proponent and protector of civil rights. It just doesn't make sense to me that he would ever think that torture is ok. I also would suspect that if you were to have a private conversation with Rand Paul that his sentiments would have been more in line with his dad's, but the truth of the matter is that there is nothing he can do to help Bradley Manning or change his circumstances at this point and this is something that the establishment would love to use against him if given even the smallest of opportunities and Rand was wise enough not to give it to them. Rand's record to date; however, speaks very loudly to me about where he stands on protecting civil rights and I do not for a minute believe that he thinks that the physical mistreatment of Bradley Manning is ok, but as you alluded to, maybe it is something he should take the time to clarify.

the problem is--

that such laws deal with theory and the ideal--

which doesn't exist.

*our* national defense agencies aren't defending the freedom of anyone in America--

aren't defending America--

to pretend they are is not going to accomplish anything.

The agencies have gone rogue--

Yes, Rand is playing the political game, which is probably necessary in a nation that has lost most of its freedoms already.

Will he, if he gets to be POTUS, be able to do anything to restore any of those freedoms.

I don't know.

I don't want to discredit Rand. I just don't have much hope for the future of this nation--

hope for humanity, yes--

under God.

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Denise B's picture

I don't disagree

with you all that much 1988 and I too realize that the ship is sinking fast, but while it's still above water we can not give up trying to patch the holes. Just as Thomas Jefferson said that "resistance to tyranny is obedience to God", it is our duty to keep resisting, no matter how bad it looks. I too agree that ultimately our hope and our future rests with God alone, but we as his people are admonished not to fear, and not to give up because our God is a mighty God and who knows what He may decide to do. You are right that most, if not all of our government agencies have gone rogue, but that doesn't mean we have to just concede defeat and stop trying. I do believe that Rand Paul is a person who's heart and intentions are in the right place and if given the opportunity I do believe that he could do a lot as president to make a difference. It is amazing what only one person can do, but thankfully he wouldn't be working alone, but in concert with all of the other good people out there that are working to reverse our present path to destruction. But, we have to work together and realize that there is not going to be any perfect candidate, because there is no perfect person, but if we are blessed enough to have people step forward that will at least honor their oaths of office (which Rand has done) then I hope we could be smart enough to support those people when they do appear.

GTFO! A Politician playing Politics!!??

Do you guys really expect him to dig his own political grave over things that are clearly out of his or anyone else's control? Should David have warned Goliath that he had a slingshot and was about to embed a stone in his forehead before he'd take Goliath's sword to cut his head off with?

Actions always speak louder and have greater effect than words alone.

"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience"—Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

Exactly! Playing politics to win the Libertarian vote!

He is sly like a fox. He knows he has the Paul name, and is such a smart politician to capture the growing Tea Party movement and the Libertarian wing of the Republican party. One day soon, he will convince the RNC that he is the best candidate to grow the base and deliver these votes in 2016.

Go Rand Paul! Yeah Red team! Beat the Blue team! Rah Rah Rah!!

We all want progress, but if you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.

-C. S. Lewis

you forgot the part

where after the inauguration, they sit him down and have him watch the zapruder film, and then they ask him if he has any questions.

thanks bill hicks.

Yes, he sure is bridging gaps but

it's him against Team Purple (Blue+Red).

"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience"—Pierre Teilhard de Chardin


Freedom Ninja, I was trying to think of a logical way to say it, but you just hit it on the head. Rand has to choose his battles, and watch everything he says. I can just see him in a debate so Rand Paul, Bradley Manning was sentenced to 90 years in prison for releasing information that caused death and mayhem and you support him. This would be a story they would twist all over Rand. Rand has to watch every issue like it will cost him an election, talk about pressure.

Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must. like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.-Thomas Paine

The R3volution requires action, not observation!!!!