> encouraging the theft of classified intel belonging to the US and then publishing it.
Actually the order is the opposite: he received intel which had already been stolen - which is legal, see New York Times Co. v. United States - and then encouraged Manning to search for any more stuff, but never received anything more.
Actually the order is the opposite: he received intel which had already been stolen - which is legal, see New York Times Co. v. United States - and then encouraged Manning to search for any more stuff, but never received anything more.