[CorvusCrypto]

At face value it doesn't seem so crazy to charge him for this. I mean it is committing a crime by proxy as opposed to passively obtaining information from a source (the latter of which journalists should be protected for).

If I give tools and a robbery checklist to someone and tell them to rob a bank, surely I'm still able to be charged and probably for a higher crime right? At least that's how these charges seem to me. I guess I don't see how it's invalid.

I do however see how this could set a dangerous precedent should the courts allow loose interpretation of the outcome to mean "reporting leaked information is illegal"

[JudgeWapner]

what "crime by proxy" ? Manning was an agent of the US. He (must have) had some level of secret clearance. Just because he didn't know the password to a database doesn't make it a crime.

Those databases are illegal for non-government employees to access. If Manning had secret clearance for database {A, B, and C} but not D, it's an internal IT violation between him (at the time he was male) and his boss. If you or I (presuming you're not a gov employee) tried it, we don't have clearance and therefore it would be a crime, aka hacking.

[CorvusCrypto]

Yes that she was an agent at the time. But no that she had access to those materials. There are various levels of government access. Even if documents are marked "secret" and you have secret clearance if you don't have the passwords you don't have access. And actually in government sometimes you do have the passwords and still don't have granted access. Any tampering with a computer to gain access you didn't have approval for from your supervisors is considered hacking. Yes it's an internal IT violation, but at a government office which makes it a government offense. I hope that makes sense. It's not like a normal company where you get repercussion from that entity alone at these sorts of government orgs.