Actually the issue is whether its accurate to characterize Manning as a political prisoner and his precautionary incarceration as some sort of torture. I disagree with these characterizations and I've explained why, Zee gets very excited about this issue, but can't seem to get beyond these distorted characterizations.
What is so unreasonable about needing even 7 months to put together such a complicated case?
Suppose only about a third of the materials the military has discovered Manning passed on to Wikileaks have been published, and the government would prefer the rest of them don't get broadcast, how would that affect Manning's situation?
Assange is a participant in this Wikileaks scandal, Manning is his source and the government wants to prosecute Assange. Would it be wrong for the government to use Manning's situation in bargaining with Assange? How about using information from Manning against Assange?
I think its an "open and shut case" to prove Manning improperly disseminated the mass of classified diplomatic cables to Wikileaks and that its unlikely he would be sentenced to death, but probably will be sentenced to about 30 years in military prison.
I also think the situation Manning is in offers the government all sorts of bargaining techniques to apply on Assange and this is the goal. I think Manning must be kept in 'limbo' until it is clear either Assange is completely unsympathetic to the poor Private's plight or unaffraid of whatever the government claims they found out from him.
No doubt Manning will be convicted in a court martial. His advocates won't be able to offer all sorts of expert witnesses to highlight the private's loable intentions and righteous indignation, he's going to get a military general sitting on the bench trully disgusted with the revolting private. No bleeding heart Legal Aid and ACLU entourage will prance around the military court's chambers entreating a jury to admire this reckless misconduct, I expect the jury will be calling for Manning's crucifixion!