You're watching...
Lis Wiehl and Tamara Holder discuss Bradley Manning's impending trial on the charges of leaking classified documents.
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
I tell -- illegally seize up and the F truly getting towards the -- Bradley Manning Bradley Manning you'll remember rather massive 87 I think was is online handle.
Is the guy who allegedly leaked all the classified documents to WikiLeaks we have a hearing actually beginning today his.
Out lawyers appeared to be are getting ready to argue least that he was treated even -- -- exactly did what what do you what do you make the latest case not gonna.
It makes sense for that -- look the defense lawyers have to put this out there that they're gonna say he was treated humanely this is what happened to him he's been punished enough don't punish many more court system.
As a prosecutor I wouldn't take that at for a second but I understand why they're making that argument is really the only argument they have because it's pretty clear that he -- -- the -- of these these messages you.
-- -- -- -- I think -- accuse totally separate issues the behavior that he that he allegedly engaged and it occurred before.
He is the alleged it you know -- -- -- -- -- to argue that the that this has always cumulative effect right right but.
I but -- the defense attorney and I don't think that that's strong argument itself but so -- a mile.
There's only rented the talent how old do you defend him.
You defense cannot I I would guess that this is the best way that.
That they can defend and that as an hour of coercion which is something that happens in criminal cases all the time that you were I you were fed.
-- you were tortured and and as a result you were forced to do something and and so that's really I think the best way to they're gonna and -- -- -- -- -- -- have.
But it about what evidence they really have a but I would prosecute is exactly this that there was really no evidence of him being tortured or anything like that.
And the fact is as camera already made my case for -- these messages came out way before his predilection his -- is media is cremated and meditation was already there there was nothing that the government -- quote did to him.
Other that what this man did on his own that's my case.
So he did this first then it isn't that as a as as a theory he did this first.
Then the government mistreat him if you exit there except -- -- and I understand that but where does that.
To help him legally in any way.
It only helped -- if he's made any statements or they brought him into custody and and now they're trying to get additional information from and then they can what what did you is -- -- emotions to some cracks.
-- to suppress statements or whatever information they got so it's through to the poisonous tree if they did something wrong the anything that happened as a result of that is poison and therefore cannot come -- to court.
I don't think -- -- it in the I think that there's enough evidence against him.
That throw it all out -- still doesn't -- so.
At least this -- -- this he's slam dunk for the prosecution I'd never say slam dunk for prosecutors say it's a plant a for effort -- side but it's a very -- -- strong case for the prosecution absolutely why.
Because you happy to have the evidence in all in all of the that the -- that they -- Chelsea's of the state secrets that he sent out.
Leaked to him you don't need his statements at all but you don't need anything from him but that's.
Again a different issue as to whether what he did was wrong that's really what the core the crux of the case it did -- do it did well are they -- -- public knowledge should be be public knowledge that's really why this whole WikiLeaks.
Was even created does the public have a right now.
So we take the torture.
Out of -- out of that night we still have the issue did did he do something wrong.
And police is going to argue yes he did the defense is going to argue no he didn't he had a right to disclose this information.
There's so that's what this comes down to -- -- Was the -- all of these it's nothing to do anyway he's being treated it's nothing to do with anything else that's -- core of it.
Is what is it -- what was what he put out over the wire illegal that I bulging with that illegal.
Prosecutions could argue yes and whatever happened to waiter has nothing to do with that and -- what -- is that decided is this is this a code of military rule.
Could -- military law and federal law means we vote.
And and you say yes -- -- he's absolutely.
I had an I don't think that it's that it's that simple I think that -- US and depending on what he said that they're going to -- light came out as a result of torture was he doing this at the direction if somebody else was authorized to do it.
Totem pole.
He is not the main got its involvement as I don't think I don't think that he's.
That he's -- mean do you think there's no conspiracy -- yeah.
Yeah somebody hired -- flip flipped him and then get that information that has happened.
Well no but I think that's why they're trying to suppress this information that they're saying that he's saying came as a result torture.
All right we will watch it all very closely it will be interesting case indeed.
Tell how all -- -- -- in September of music right to practice.
Tell -- criminal defense -- policies contributed thank you very much at least we'll Fox News legal analyst great to have you but if he had and I'm very glad that you're both very powerful independent and very scary and still loved by your -- is obviously.
