My understanding is that she did not, though this gets way into the weeds of the military trial. I can try to dig this up if you're interested (been a couple years since I read about that particular facet).
She claimed a lot of legally nonsensical things on stand so I'm not sure any of it passed any scrutiny. It certainly didn't with the judge.
This was a grand jury proceeding. While this was about a matter that happened while she was in the military, anyone that is granted immunity but refuses to testify could be held in contempt by the court.
By Order dated May 6, 2019 [Doc. 2], the Court granted Chelsea Manning full use and
derivative use immunity, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 6002, and ordered Ms. Manning to testify and
provide other information in the above-captioned grand jury proceeding ("Grand Jury").
All she had to do was testify truthfully about the matters she was being asked about. Fifth amendment is irrelevant in this context.
She claimed a lot of legally nonsensical things on stand so I'm not sure any of it passed any scrutiny. It certainly didn't with the judge.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/chelsea-m...