That's a Logical fallacy. This has nothing to do with Bradley Manning.
As far as you and I know Mcafee quite possibly killed his neighbour. Why shouldn't the authorities in the country where the crime was committed get hold of him?
If the dead neighbour had been an American celebrity, this argument would sound very different.
Yes it has, in the context of the present argument. Grandparent is saying that because you supposedly are in a "democratic country with an independent judiciary" doesn't mean that you won't be tortured/get a fair trial/etc., and uses Bradley Manning as an example of this.
If you were to assert that in democratic societies with functioning justice systems people are not let off for murder, then I think OJ would be a perfectly reasonable counter argument.
There's actually a lot of evidence that the vic was involved with and owed a lot of money to coke dealers who killed her in a manner consistent with prior M.O.s so while I did at one point believe OJ did it, there is some doubt in my mind and without having been at the trial and heard all the evidence I do not believe OJ actually would be a reasonable counter argument.
She had been telling the coke dealers, "Don't worry my man's rich he'll pay." When in fact he had told her many times that he wouldn't pay and many of his friends told him he better get very far away from her while he still can and before she gets herself and maybe him killed by the people she had been taking drugs from.
If you are going to call something out as fallacious, you should name which fallacy it is. Otherwise your statement is just as good as saying 'you are wrong!'
As far as you and I know Mcafee quite possibly killed his neighbour. Why shouldn't the authorities in the country where the crime was committed get hold of him?
If the dead neighbour had been an American celebrity, this argument would sound very different.