Did the Pentagon Misinform Obama When It Said Bradley Manning’s Treatment Met Our Standards?

Back on March 11, in response to Jake Tapper’s question whether he agreed with PJ Crowley’s judgment that Bradley Manning’s treatment was “ridiculous and counterproductive and stupid,” President Obama said the Pentagon had assured him that the treatment met DOD standards.

Tapper: The State Department Spokesman PJ Crowley said the treatment of Bradley Manning by the Pentagon is “ridiculous and counterproductive and stupid,” and I’m wondering if you agree with that. Thank you sir.

Obama: With respect to Private Manning, I have actually asked the Pentagon whether or not the procedures that have been taken in terms of his confinement are appropriate and are meeting our basic standards. They assure me that they are. I can’t go into details about some of their concerns, but some of this has to do with Private Manning’s safety as well.

Tapper: Do you disagree with PJ Crowley?

Obama: I think I gave you an answer to the substantive issue.

But yesterday’s press conference appears to present problems for this story.

First of all, according to DOD General Counsel Jeh Johnson, the Pentagon review of whether Quantico was the appropriate facility for Manning began just a few weeks ago–so presumably, it started sometime after Obama was asked about Manning’s treatment over five weeks ago.

MR. JOHNSON: Well, again, it was a combination of reasons. We began to take a look at this a couple of weeks ago. You know, is there an alternative facility that might be better for him given the length of time he’s been in pre-trial confinement, given the length of time — in the future it looks — it looks as if he’ll be in pre-trial confinement. And we have this 706 interview of him coming up. And we decided, well, why don’t we let that happen first and then he should be transferred, so that — so that the group that interviews him, who as I understand are in the Washington area, don’t need to go out to Kansas. So we’ll do that, and then we’ll move him after that.

Q: You said — I think you said that that — I think a couple of weeks ago that (inaudible) —

MR. JOHNSON: Yes.

Q: — what triggered that?

MR. JOHNSON: Well, you know, this issue has been obviously in the media.

Under normal circumstances, I’d like to believe that we — if there were issues about whether another facility is more suitable for one of our pre-trial confinees, we would — we would take a look at that in a comprehensive joint fashion. Because this has been in the newspapers, people at our level have been involved in taking a look at that as well. And so that’s the process that began several weeks ago.

Q: So it is fair to say that media criticism about his treatment did play some role in his transfer here.

MR. JOHNSON: I wouldn’t characterize it that way. I think it is fair to say that because this case has been in the media, people at Dr. Westphal’s level and my level have been involved in this process, and that’s fair to say.

And while Johnson claims that Manning’s Quantico treatment was legal, both he and Under Secretary of the Army Joseph Westphal admit that Quantico is not appropriate for long-term pre-trial detention.

Johnson: We remain satisfied that Private Manning’s pre-trial confinement at Quantico was in compliance with legal and regulatory standards in all respects, and we salute the military personnel there for the job they did in difficult circumstances.

[snip]

MR. WESTPHAL: Let me just add to that.

I think the issue there is, we began discussing the fact that Private Manning had been at this facility now at Quantico for — at this time, over eight months, and that this is a facility really designed for — and the average stay for pre-trial is maybe two months. I don’t have all the details, but it’s a short stay. It’s not designed for these long-term situations.

Indeed, Johnson even admits it is “rare if not unprecedented” that someone would be held there for nine or ten months.

Q: What was no longer suitable at Quantico?

MR. JOHNSON: As Dr. Westphal said, Quantico is a place where pre-trial confinees reside for one month, two months, three months. It is rare if not unprecedented that somebody is there for as long as nine or 10 months.

When Obama was asked whether Manning’s treatment was appropriate, Manning had been in Quantico for almost eight months, several times longer–according to Johnson and Westphal–than appropriate for someone to be held in pre-trial detention at Quantico.

So how is it that the President of the United States stated he had been assured by DOD that Manning’s treatment was appropriate? Did the Pentagon misinform Obama? Or did the Pentagon not even review Manning’s treatment until after Obama got asked such questions and answered as if such a review had already taken place?

image_print
  1. Teddy Partridge says:

    Who at the Pentagon mislead Obama?

    Is it possible no one did, and that he spoke extemporaneously about Manning’s treatment, hoping for the best? And that began the search for evidence to post-facto backstop the President’s supposed receipt of assurances? And that, then, someone at the Pentagon realized that, in fact, Manning’s treatment did not meet its own standards? And that he needed to be moved across the country to make the President’s statement true?

    Smells like yellowcake to me.

    • bailey2739 says:

      Sorry, it’s NOT the USA, It’s all “Clarence Thomas” Obama. He’s the guy on top, period. Obama OWNS the Manning debacle, no one else. I know of no one act that so clearly characterizes Obama for who he really is. The only remaining question is, how many Democrats will vote for him again anyway. Disgraceful.

      • bell says:

        the snowball has been rolling down the hill for a while now.. it’s gotten more momentum under obama… one can’t excuse the many other ”leaders” who have knowingly or otherwise been responsible for the sorry state of affairs the usa finds itself in…

  2. scribe says:

    “They told me they did” is something I learned, as a young second lieutenant, does not fly. Your subordinates will lie to you that they are carrying out your orders, if that lie means they can do less work, unless and until they fear your retribution more than they fear work. Obama may have been answering honestly, in his carefully parsed lawyer-language, but that doesn’t mean he was given honest information.

    And anyone who knows anything could have seen this coming: a substantial number of the cases involving recruit/trainee mistreatment/maltreatment seem to come from the Marine Corps. Mistreatment and maltreatment are in their DNA, along with the culty “Creed of the Rifle” (This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is mine. Without me, it is useless. Without it, I am useless. yadda yadda) and and their semi-S&M way of doing things.

    And where was the Army hierarchy when all this was going on? Even in Animal House, there was more loyalty downward (“They can’t do that to our pledges! Only we can do that to our pledges!”) than the Army Chief of Staff and the rest of the Army showed to Manning. They just threw him to the Marines.

    Jackasses, all of them.

  3. JTMinIA says:

    I was home-schooled, so I’m a tad weak on any aspect of geography that isn’t discussed in the New Testament. Which is closer to where Dennis Kucinich usually is: Quantico or Levenworth?

    ps. /s pinheads

  4. PeasantParty says:

    CYA all the way!

    How many more times do we have to sit through stomach wrenching abuses of laws just so the PTB can play Cover your Ass?

    Manning should never have been in a Marine brig to start with. EW, myself, and tons of others have said so repeatedly. Marines will always one-up the Army in anyway possible. Especially if given an excuse to do so, like not enough proper respect and bullshit like that.

  5. manys says:

    The problem with Obama trying to play piggy-in-the-middle is that one or both sides may abandon the game at any time.

  6. cregan says:

    The odd thing is that this does not address the main concern of some people which is “Should he be held at all?”

    To some people, it does not matter what treatment he gets, he is a hero and should not be held at all.

  7. earlofhuntingdon says:

    To many people, the issue is that Manning is innocent until proven guilty in a speedy and public trial, at which he had the full assistance of competent counsel, and that the crimes he is charged with were crimes at the time he allegedly committed them.

    Neither he nor any American citizen or other person subject to our laws or the reach of our government should be presumed guilty because of the “seriousness of the charges” against him (the escapist fantasy formulation used by Fox News and many in Congress). Nor should any person be held indefinitely without trial or after a finding of innocent, or for any period in conditions that are cruel, torturous or inhumane.

  8. chetnolian says:

    Can any of you US lawyers out there tell me how long they can keep Manning incarcerated without bringing him to trial? Is there a limit? In the UK we had a major political row over 90 days.Is the Army different from civilians in this regard?

    • bobschacht says:

      There used to be a limit. Something about habeas corpus, which his lawyer was about to file. But that kind of thinking is so, so yesterday. We’re looking forward now. /s

      On a more serious note, EW, it is difficult to try to answer your final set of questions without resorting to sarcasm, or snark.

      Bob in AZ

  9. MadDog says:

    The ill-treatment of Bradley Manning would not have reached the public eye nor even the MSM, were it not for the stellar efforts of bloggers like Marcy Wheeler, Jane Hamsher, Glenn Greenwald, bmaz, David Dayen, Michael Whitney, the whole cast and crew at FDL, their commenters, and many others, as well organizations like the ACLU.

    The MSM, in particular, began covering the ill-treatment of Bradley Manning in large part because of these efforts.

    While some in the MSM may have had altruistic motives in their Bradley Manning coverage, there’s also no doubt that in some cases the merest whiff of scandal triggered the usual MSM Gotcha Journalism response to their coverage.

    That said, Marcy Wheeler, Jane Hamsher, Glenn Greenwald, bmaz, and those many others should take a bow for constructing the narrative that the MSM appropriated.

    The recent MSM coverage of Bradley Manning by such stalwart MSM giants as the NYT, the WaPo, the Guardian, CBS, NBC, ABC, and CNN, all made use of that very narrative.

    In is one thing to capture their attention, it is another grand thing entirely to provide their opinions for them.

    On a closing note, Jane’s appearance this afternoon on MSNBC discussing this latest news of Bradley Manning’s move with Tameron Hall was gratifying in keeping the pressure on the Obama Administration.

    Yes, a battle has been won, but this is a war and it is not over.

    • bobschacht says:

      The ill-treatment of Bradley Manning would not have reached the public eye nor even the MSM, were it not for the stellar efforts of bloggers like Marcy Wheeler, Jane Hamsher, Glenn Greenwald, bmaz, David Dayen, Michael Whitney, the whole cast and crew at FDL, their commenters, and many others, as well organizations like the ACLU.

      Well, let’s not forget P.J. Crowley. He is the one who put it on the front page.

      On a closing note, Jane’s appearance this afternoon on MSNBC discussing this latest news of Bradley Manning’s move with Tameron Hall was gratifying in keeping the pressure on the Obama Administration.

      Jane was just on MSNBC again, on Dylan Ratigan’s show, along with P.J. Crowley. Kudos again!

      Yes, a battle has been won, but this is a war and it is not over.

      Not by a long shot!

      Bob in AZ

  10. donbacon says:

    While we commonly say that the Pentagon or the White House did something, meaning that the people in the building did something, it’s not common to ask a question to a building, nor especially is it normal to “actually” ask a question to a building, nor is it common (particularly for a chief executive) to get an answer from several people after actually asking a question to a building.

    But Obama did all three.

    I have actually asked the Pentagon whether or not the procedures that have been taken in terms of his confinement are appropriate and are meeting our basic standards. They assure me that they are.

    A truthful person in a position of responsibility would say instead: I asked Bob Gates and he assured me etc. etc.

    Folks, we’ve got ourselves a ringer here.

  11. donbacon says:

    Nobody can predict the future, but based on what we know I believe there’s a good chance that Pfc. Manning will now receive better treatment. Confining Manning, a gay Army soldier charged with leaking government secrets, in a Marine brig was bound to turn out badly for many reasons, and it has.

    Some of it came from the top. Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the US military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, said last summer that the leakers “might already have on their hands the blood of some young soldier or that of an Afghan family” because, he said, the leaked documents included the names of Afghan informants.

  12. bluewombat says:

    Did the Pentagon misinform Obama?

    Regardless of whether it did or not, the buck stops at BHO’s desk.

    This question always reminds me of Humphrey Bogart’s exchange with Claude Rains in Casablanca:

    “Rick, why did you come to Casablanca?”

    “For the water.”

    “But there is no water in Casablanca!”

    “I was misinformed.”

    First Bogie, now BHO.

  13. one_outer says:

    What a total failure of a president.

    Let’s say that he’s not being mendacious and was genuinely misled by DOD. So fucking what? He’s been president for over two years now. If in that time he hasn’t been able to figure out how to get reliable information out of the Pentagon he’s not qualified to run a McDonalds let alone the executive branch. So I think he would be definitely lying if he actually tried to play the “that’s what they told me” game.

    What a dick.

  14. dakine01 says:

    Well there’s standards and then there’s standards.

    There’s standards for normal people awaiting a courts martial.

    Then there’s the standards shown at Abu Grhaib and Gitmo..It just all depends on the definition of standards being used.

  15. Sophist says:

    Oliver North,
    Valerie Plame,
    Bradley Manning
    all poster-child
    distractions
    from serious
    criminal actions

  16. kabuki101 says:

    Bambi is a torture supporting, fascist goon and belongs in jail for the rest of his life. Let’s work towards the goal of “justice for Bambi, justice for all”.

  17. eCAHNomics says:

    Army Joseph Westphal admit that Quantico is not appropriate for long-term pre-trial detention.

    Did anyone ask the jerk when is long pretrial detention ever legal at all, regardless of where it is. Didn’t think so.

  18. ThingsComeUndone says:

    Obama has history on the issue of torture and fake police confessions back in Illinois Obama successfully pushed for all police interviews to be taped. I admit I don’t know if that is for every arrest or just death penalty cases.

    . The police were under terrible pressure to solve this case. People were incensed that “nothing was being done”.
    DuPage County had a really fast-growing community in Naperville with upscale homes and 60,000 people, then 80,000 and now over 145,000. It also had the largest number of triplets born in a community in one year. DuPage owed a lot to the growth of Naperville.
    Then, a young man with a criminal record of theft and burglary, came forward with a “dream” that he had.(Of course, they took no record or statements about this dream. It took a new Senator named Obama to require that interviews be taped.) It was about the murder of little Jeanne Nicarico. It really wasn’t much, but if anything in the dream led to the killer, then there was a reward of $10,000.
    The police, having no other suspects, seized on Rolando Cruz and his “friend” Alex Hernandez and used a little “pressure” to get Hernandez to testify against Cruz and Steve Buckley. Guess which one had a hung jury?
    Anyway, Cruz got the death penalty and Hernandez got 80 years.

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/01/02/669652/-Rolando-Cruz-was-railroaded

    Still Obama cannot plead he did not know or was not aware of this issue or how the police bend the rules to get confessions.

  19. Surtt says:

    Obama needs to get a break on this, normally when you call someone a terrorist, you can just “disappear” them. I think it caught him off guard they anyone still cares about Manning.
    (I wish I could use the snark label, but I think it is true)

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      That concept of “normal” may be Dick Cheney’s or Karl Rove’s, it’s not normal by any other definition or by the law of the land.

      As for being caught “off guard”, the Manning case is the single most important whistleblower case the White House is paying attention to. It’s its principal demonstration of how it intends to intimidate and to treat all whistleblowers. It’s a hoped for lynchpin in its yet-to-be-assembled case against WikiLeaks and Julian Assange.

      The only people caught off guard about what’s happening to Manning are Manning and his lawyer, and the American public that is increasingly taking notice that the president’s actions and rhetoric do not agree with each other.

  20. bailey2739 says:

    By the way, it’s been well over a month since Obama’s statement on Manning. It doesn’t matter if the Pentagon misled him or not. What matters is Obama has shown his true character & belief system – period.

    • eCAHNomics says:

      So wuz he shackled, wearing ear mufflers, blocked goggles & adult diapers.

      Inquiring minds…

  21. Teddy Partridge says:

    You are speaking about a Commander-in-Chief, recall, who is dealing with subordinates for the very first time in his career, for all intents and purposes. He certainly lacks bullshit detection expertise that any of us with subordinates in our work experience developed quickly.

    Above meant as reply to scribe at 3

    • eCAHNomics says:

      Oh Teddy, you are so quaint.

      Dya suppose for a moment that O’s minders aren’t whispering in his ear: This is what you want to hear; or Pay no attention to this one.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Is it possible that our Teddy thinks that bullshit production and detection are unknown quantities at Columbia University or at Harvard Law School? You may not have read enough term papers and applications for admission.

      Is it possible that an inability to detect bullshit would lead to the long-term success of an actor inside the business of community organizing in Chicago? In historically non-partisan Illinois State politics? In the politics of finding, hiring, firing and utilizing Hill staffers and political mentors (like Joe Lieberman)? Or in the mega-businesses known as running for the US Senate and for President of these here United States.

      How quaint. Are you from Portland? *g*

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        His sense of direction is rather more like the Scarecrow’s in the Wizard of Oz: both directions are equally good to him, so long as he keeps telling Dorothy, “We’re going the right way.”

  22. spanishinquisition says:

    I think the issue there is, we began discussing the fact that Private Manning had been at this facility now at Quantico for — at this time, over eight months, and that this is a facility really designed for — and the average stay for pre-trial is maybe two months. I don’t have all the details, but it’s a short stay. It’s not designed for these long-term situations.

    So how many others are in “long-term pre-trial confinement”? The very idea seems to be against both Constitutional protections as well as UCMJ additional protections. Short of Gitmo, I don’t think any facility is designed for these types of situations since those situations are illegal…which keep in mind Obama tried to turn Fort Leavenworth into Gitmo North.

    • tjallen says:

      “keep in mind Obama tried to turn Fort Leavenworth into Gitmo North.”

      Leavenworth IS now Gitmo North, a lifetime terrorist confinement center, and Manning the first US citizen in the war on terror locked up forever, on US soil, without trial, just like those terrorists we hold permanently captive in Cuba.

      So long as the current leadership of the Pentagon wants it this way, so long as this “war” continues, he’ll never get a trial, and never again see the outside. This is long term, no-trial confinement, just like the terrorists get.

      We who protest this need to get used to the idea that this is meant to be forever, lifetime confinement of Manning, without trial, by the Pentagon, and the general public over time will forget about him. Because there will be more. All of us who protest this militarization of the US are headed for threats of similar military confinement. Get used to it, this is what the USA is today.

  23. frankiet1 says:

    Johnson: We remain satisfied that Private Manning’s pre-trial confinement at Quantico was in compliance with legal and regulatory standards in all respects, and we salute the military personnel there for the job they did in difficult circumstances.

    What an arrogant lying sack of shit! The conditions of his confinement were against the UMCJ and the SOP of any kind of prison for a prisoner at pre-trial.

    He’d be so nice to have Jeh Johnson in the witness stand having to repeat that shit under oath. The REMF would be squealing and squirming big time.