3
3
0
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 4
The writer presents a lopsided view of the story that ignores a number of facts worth mentioning.
Why does the writer only worry about "unlawful command influence" (UCI) when looking at CANDIDATE Trumps comments? Did Obama and two other cabinet level officers try to influence, perhaps unlawfully, the military justice system?
Obama knew the entire Bergdahl story as an investigation had gone on for years after Bergdahl deserted. Obama, Rice and Clinton all decided to publically state that Bergdahl served with distinction and honor in a blatant attempt to influence opinions about him. Where is the outcry for UCI there?
Then Obama brings Mom and Dad to the white house to attempt to further influence possible legal judgment against him by painting him as a hero, again. Obama did this to try to cover up the rotten deal he made. The writer of this story acted like it was expected that the released prisoners would go back to the fight. That is not how Obama presented it. We had assurance from the countries we released them too etc. etc. etc.
UCI goes both ways. Trump was a candidate, Obama was the President of the United States when he knowingly positioned Bergdahl as a hero when he was going to be tried for desertion. Who exercised more UCI, Candidate Trump or President Obama. Honestly, the clowns that right his story have no shame and are as dishonest as they come.
Why does the writer only worry about "unlawful command influence" (UCI) when looking at CANDIDATE Trumps comments? Did Obama and two other cabinet level officers try to influence, perhaps unlawfully, the military justice system?
Obama knew the entire Bergdahl story as an investigation had gone on for years after Bergdahl deserted. Obama, Rice and Clinton all decided to publically state that Bergdahl served with distinction and honor in a blatant attempt to influence opinions about him. Where is the outcry for UCI there?
Then Obama brings Mom and Dad to the white house to attempt to further influence possible legal judgment against him by painting him as a hero, again. Obama did this to try to cover up the rotten deal he made. The writer of this story acted like it was expected that the released prisoners would go back to the fight. That is not how Obama presented it. We had assurance from the countries we released them too etc. etc. etc.
UCI goes both ways. Trump was a candidate, Obama was the President of the United States when he knowingly positioned Bergdahl as a hero when he was going to be tried for desertion. Who exercised more UCI, Candidate Trump or President Obama. Honestly, the clowns that right his story have no shame and are as dishonest as they come.
(3)
(0)
Cpl Jeff N.
MSgt Steve Sweeney - Steve, The release was 5 years after Berdahl's desertion. The Army completed a full investigation of the matter and had interviewed everyone down to his platoon mates. The Army was aware of the evidence and there were stories at the time that Obama was briefed on the desertion angle. Clearly they had to wait for Bergdahl to get back to prosecute him but the Army's case was all but completed (other than Bergdahl's testimony).
Obama wanted to empty Gitmo and he used this ploy to release 5 of the most dangerous inmates in the camp. He was aware of the Army's investigation and findings and chose to go forward anyway. You might recall at the time the congress was furious Obama made the deal. 3 of the 5 went back to the fight as was a concern. Obama's desire to close Gitmo was very high as it was a major promise of his out of the box. I am sure the calculus went something like this...If we can release 5 of the worst, perhaps we can release the rest too. What he didn't count on was the blow up from the congress and the people.
Obama wanted to empty Gitmo and he used this ploy to release 5 of the most dangerous inmates in the camp. He was aware of the Army's investigation and findings and chose to go forward anyway. You might recall at the time the congress was furious Obama made the deal. 3 of the 5 went back to the fight as was a concern. Obama's desire to close Gitmo was very high as it was a major promise of his out of the box. I am sure the calculus went something like this...If we can release 5 of the worst, perhaps we can release the rest too. What he didn't count on was the blow up from the congress and the people.
(0)
(0)
Cpl Jeff N.
CPT (Anonymous) - Dear Captain whatshisname, his command influence, at the time he was President of the Unites States, was material and real. He attempted to influence the perception of Bergdahl to buttress his stupid move to trade for him. His comments as POTUS could and likely did influence military officers responsible for the case. This could be one of the reasons it took so long to get Bergdahl to trial.
If you are going to get angry at candidate Trump and give POTUS Obama a pass then you are part of the problem.
If you are going to get angry at candidate Trump and give POTUS Obama a pass then you are part of the problem.
(0)
(0)
Cpl Jeff N.
MSgt Steve Sweeney - There was a preliminary investigation done back in 2009 when he deserted. NCIS did one of them and produced a lot of the evidence about why he left. It painted a pretty clear picture for all to see. That information was known by the Army and it's command structure well before the trade. I am not mistaken, you are ignoring the investigation(s) that were done when he deserted and only talking about the final investigation as part of the run up to his trial.
The June 2014 investigation You are talking about the final formal investigation after he was returned. You can put your head in the sand if you like and act as though no one investigated his disappearance back when it happened. Most of that evidence made its way into the final investigation once Bergdahl was back. Bergdahl pleaded guilty because he is guilty of exactly what the initial and final investigations produced.
I understand he is innocent until proven guilty (or he pleads guilty) but the information about his disappearance was known by the command structure. To suggest otherwise is disingenuous at best.
The June 2014 investigation You are talking about the final formal investigation after he was returned. You can put your head in the sand if you like and act as though no one investigated his disappearance back when it happened. Most of that evidence made its way into the final investigation once Bergdahl was back. Bergdahl pleaded guilty because he is guilty of exactly what the initial and final investigations produced.
I understand he is innocent until proven guilty (or he pleads guilty) but the information about his disappearance was known by the command structure. To suggest otherwise is disingenuous at best.
(0)
(0)
Cpl Jeff N.
MSgt Steve Sweeney - I know what was reported in many news outlets. I don't write the stories but I do read them and multi source them. I thought it odd that NCIS would be involved but perhaps they had assets in the area.
So, do you believe an investigation was not done when he deserted? Do you not believe his platoon mates, and leaders were not interviewed. To a man, they have all said they told investigators that he deserted. He walked away from his post without permission. Many of the activities documented indicate he had determined to leave. He ended up with the Taliban and has not plead guilty to what we all knew he did.
The Army, after the initial investigation would have had all of this information. He was the only American service member held by the enemy you somehow think the entire intelligence apparatus of the country had no idea what happened. They either didn't interview or refused to accept the story from those on the ground and ignored the obvious conclusion.
When Obama decided he wanted to swap for Bergdahl do you think do one offered any of the background information about the investigation? Do you think they thought he had acted appropriately and this was all a big misunderstanding? Almost everyone knew he deserted and if Obama didn't know that he chose not to know that.
I also suspect he made it clear to his commanders he was going to do this and the narrative was going to be that he served with distinction and honor although anyone paying attention knew that was not true. Steve you can choose to accept the preposterous "distinction and honor" story from Obama. I know better. He cannot piss down my back and tell me it is raining and get me to believe it.
So, do you believe an investigation was not done when he deserted? Do you not believe his platoon mates, and leaders were not interviewed. To a man, they have all said they told investigators that he deserted. He walked away from his post without permission. Many of the activities documented indicate he had determined to leave. He ended up with the Taliban and has not plead guilty to what we all knew he did.
The Army, after the initial investigation would have had all of this information. He was the only American service member held by the enemy you somehow think the entire intelligence apparatus of the country had no idea what happened. They either didn't interview or refused to accept the story from those on the ground and ignored the obvious conclusion.
When Obama decided he wanted to swap for Bergdahl do you think do one offered any of the background information about the investigation? Do you think they thought he had acted appropriately and this was all a big misunderstanding? Almost everyone knew he deserted and if Obama didn't know that he chose not to know that.
I also suspect he made it clear to his commanders he was going to do this and the narrative was going to be that he served with distinction and honor although anyone paying attention knew that was not true. Steve you can choose to accept the preposterous "distinction and honor" story from Obama. I know better. He cannot piss down my back and tell me it is raining and get me to believe it.
(1)
(0)
Justice within the confines of our legal system. That is the only option. What happens after.... happens after.
(3)
(0)
He should get more, but due to the appearance of command influence due to Trump and others not being able to keep their mouth shut and avoid stupid comments.
I say take his guilty plead, which means all promotion since his capture are nullified, then sentance to 5 years in the brig and lost of pay with all but 60 days suspended. Then a dishonorable discharge. He have to pay back all the back pay from his promations, have a felony record and cant vote, own a gun and so forth. His ass is out of the army with a big bill he owes the army.
Now its a light sentance, but also defeats any counter by him and his lawyers to appeal based on that the president influence his sentance. If he gets life he can appeal and will probaly win
I say take his guilty plead, which means all promotion since his capture are nullified, then sentance to 5 years in the brig and lost of pay with all but 60 days suspended. Then a dishonorable discharge. He have to pay back all the back pay from his promations, have a felony record and cant vote, own a gun and so forth. His ass is out of the army with a big bill he owes the army.
Now its a light sentance, but also defeats any counter by him and his lawyers to appeal based on that the president influence his sentance. If he gets life he can appeal and will probaly win
(2)
(0)
Read This Next