America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 9 years ago by Abrignac. 58 replies replies.
2 Pages12>
Military charges Bergdahl with desertion
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
jetblasted Offline
#1 Posted: Wed, Mar 25 2015, 3:45 PM EST
Joined: 08-30-2004
Posts: 42,595
His fellow soldiers died trying to find him, yet with great fanfare, Obama traded 5 Taliban Terrorists for this P.O.S. Punk and held a White House press conference w/ the deserter's parents proclaiming Bergdahl's release.

Obama reportedly had a hissy-fit upon hearing the news that the traitor would be charged.

This hissy-fit comes one week after he threw a hissy-fit upon learning Bibi won his election in Israel.

This president has the approach to the highest office in the land, like a clumsy 14 year old boy trying to get laid for the first time . . .
DrafterX Offline
#2 Posted: Wed, Mar 25 2015, 4:47 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,557
Obama will pardon him.... Mellow
Bitter Klinger Offline
#3 Posted: Wed, Mar 25 2015, 5:04 PM EST
Joined: 03-23-2013
Posts: 877
jetblasted wrote:
His fellow soldiers died trying to find him, yet with great fanfare, Obama traded 5 Taliban Terrorists for this P.O.S. Punk and held a White House press conference w/ the deserter's parents proclaiming Bergdahl's release.

Obama reportedly had a hissy-fit upon hearing the news that the traitor would be charged.

This hissy-fit comes one week after he threw a hissy-fit upon learning Bibi won his election in Israel.

This president has the approach to the highest office in the land, like a clumsy 14 year old boy trying to get laid for the first time . . .



We knew he was a deserter, I can't believe it took the Army this long. Its almost like it was done, they were just waiting for some specific reason to release it. Regardless, I'm glad he's finally been charged - better late than never.

But charged isn't yet convicted, and a court martial is a military trial - some people confuse it with actual punishment.

Watch the liberal media scoop him up, dust him off and make him a poster child for the anti-war pacifists. Him and "Peace Mom" Sheehan can go do Ellen together.

Get the media talikng about anything EXCEPT: Hillary. Yes, In a seemingly unrelated story, Ole Hilldo was just at the white house, wasn't she? Think Wonder why? Hmmm.
Burner02 Offline
#4 Posted: Wed, Mar 25 2015, 5:52 PM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
This is just total BS. A five for one trade is a win - win in any case.

And in the words of Susan Rice, "he served with honor and distinction."
Burner02 Offline
#5 Posted: Wed, Mar 25 2015, 5:57 PM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
#4 is full of BS!
rfenst Offline
#6 Posted: Wed, Mar 25 2015, 6:03 PM EST
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,336
Bitter Klinger wrote:


But charged isn't yet convicted, and a court martial is a military trial - some people confuse it with actual punishment.



Due Process.
victor809 Offline
#7 Posted: Wed, Mar 25 2015, 6:04 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Perhaps I wasn't watching the news...
... did the Taliban perform the US military trial on Bergdahl prior to the trade?

Because... you know, this being the US and all, he's kind of due that.

Now, you may think 5 taliban in exchange for 1 US soldier is a bad deal... you're perfectly free to whine about that. But to deny the trade simply because he's accused of being a deserter seems a bit presumptive.
Bitter Klinger Offline
#8 Posted: Wed, Mar 25 2015, 6:51 PM EST
Joined: 03-23-2013
Posts: 877

I think he's due a speedy trial with a jury of the same peers he served with until he deserted. Because they're the only people qualified to sit on that jury.
victor809 Offline
#9 Posted: Wed, Mar 25 2015, 7:08 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Bitter Klinger wrote:
I think he's due a speedy trial with a jury of the same peers he served with until he deserted. Because they're the only people qualified to sit on that jury.


Why would there be a jury? This is a military affair. If the court martial occurs it will be a judge or a panel. The system seems appropriate, and I fail to see what the real problem is.
MACS Offline
#10 Posted: Wed, Mar 25 2015, 9:04 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,804
Both of you are tards (the OP and Victor, but we knew Victor was a tard... apologies to tards).

A Court Martial IS a trial. It IS a court conviction (if convicted) and there WILL be a jury of his peers. If it is a General courts martial (it will be), the highest... there will be 5 jurors, at a minimum; 12 if the death penalty is on the table. 1/3 of them must be enlisted if Bergdahl chooses to ask for enlisted members on his jury. Special courts martial have at least 3 members on the jury. Only a Summary courts martial is the judge, alone (although the accused can elect to have no jury in any of them as long as the death penalty is not an option), and the guy who convenes a summary doesn't even have to be a judge! It's an officer appointed by the unit commander.

Signed - Senior Chief Master at Arms, retired, United States Navy. You're welcome.

If he is convicted, it will be a federal felony conviction.
jetblasted Offline
#11 Posted: Wed, Mar 25 2015, 9:23 PM EST
Joined: 08-30-2004
Posts: 42,595
Ehcume ?
banderl Offline
#12 Posted: Wed, Mar 25 2015, 9:28 PM EST
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
How could this guy even join the army after being discharged from the coast guard for psychological reasons?
MACS Offline
#13 Posted: Wed, Mar 25 2015, 9:48 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,804
banderl wrote:
How could this guy even join the army after being discharged from the coast guard for psychological reasons?


Hellooooo!? It's the Army! They take the guys too dumb to be Marines. Whistle
Thunder.Gerbil Offline
#14 Posted: Wed, Mar 25 2015, 9:49 PM EST
Joined: 11-02-2006
Posts: 121,359
banderl wrote:
How could this guy even join the army after being discharged from the coast guard for psychological reasons?



Dude, no one takes the puddle pirate patrol seriously.
cacman Offline
#15 Posted: Wed, Mar 25 2015, 11:23 PM EST
Joined: 07-03-2010
Posts: 12,216
Wag The Dog.
Great film.
Speyside Offline
#16 Posted: Thu, Mar 26 2015, 9:35 AM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
A military court will decide his innocence or guilt. Even though the trade was onerous to most Americans, it was the right choice if military protocol was to be followed. After all we have a military code of we leave no man behind. I for one would rather see 5 terrorists traded than 5 shoulders die during a rescue. Though I hate the thought of 5 terrorists going free.
Gene363 Offline
#17 Posted: Thu, Mar 26 2015, 11:22 AM EST
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,827

Post election scandal cleanup, SOP.
victor809 Offline
#18 Posted: Thu, Mar 26 2015, 12:56 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
MACS wrote:
Both of you are tards (the OP and Victor, but we knew Victor was a tard... apologies to tards).

A Court Martial IS a trial. It IS a court conviction (if convicted) and there WILL be a jury of his peers. If it is a General courts martial (it will be), the highest... there will be 5 jurors, at a minimum; 12 if the death penalty is on the table. 1/3 of them must be enlisted if Bergdahl chooses to ask for enlisted members on his jury. Special courts martial have at least 3 members on the jury. Only a Summary courts martial is the judge, alone (although the accused can elect to have no jury in any of them as long as the death penalty is not an option), and the guy who convenes a summary doesn't even have to be a judge! It's an officer appointed by the unit commander.

Signed - Senior Chief Master at Arms, retired, United States Navy. You're welcome.

If he is convicted, it will be a federal felony conviction.


So, I'm not disputing the "tard" charge, but when I looked it up it referenced a court martial as being either a single judge or a "panel"... no mention of who composed that panel, but also no mention of a jury in the way we usually consider a jury (non-court related individuals). I know you have more experience with this... what with you being court martialed for the sheep molestation and everything... just wanted to verify. the "jury" you reference, is that normal enlisted? or are there specifically identified people involved in the court martial?
Buckwheat Offline
#19 Posted: Thu, Mar 26 2015, 1:13 PM EST
Joined: 04-15-2004
Posts: 12,251
MACS wrote:
Both of you are tards (the OP and Victor, but we knew Victor was a tard... apologies to tards).

A Court Martial IS a trial. It IS a court conviction (if convicted) and there WILL be a jury of his peers. If it is a General courts martial (it will be), the highest... there will be 5 jurors, at a minimum; 12 if the death penalty is on the table. 1/3 of them must be enlisted if Bergdahl chooses to ask for enlisted members on his jury. Special courts martial have at least 3 members on the jury. Only a Summary courts martial is the judge, alone (although the accused can elect to have no jury in any of them as long as the death penalty is not an option), and the guy who convenes a summary doesn't even have to be a judge! It's an officer appointed by the unit commander.

Signed - Senior Chief Master at Arms, retired, United States Navy. You're welcome.

If he is convicted, it will be a federal felony conviction.


Check out the big brain on Brad Sarcasm
DrafterX Offline
#20 Posted: Thu, Mar 26 2015, 2:12 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,557
Laugh
MACS Offline
#21 Posted: Thu, Mar 26 2015, 2:59 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,804
victor809 wrote:
So, I'm not disputing the "tard" charge, but when I looked it up it referenced a court martial as being either a single judge or a "panel"... no mention of who composed that panel, but also no mention of a jury in the way we usually consider a jury (non-court related individuals). I know you have more experience with this... what with you being court martialed for the sheep molestation and everything... just wanted to verify. the "jury" you reference, is that normal enlisted? or are there specifically identified people involved in the court martial?


The "panel" is the jury. It is selected, much like we do for civilians juries, from the local military members stationed in the area, IIRC. They will all be officers (which actually benefits the accused, because they have enough intelligence to pass HS and 4 years of college) unless the accused chooses to have 1/3 of the panel or jury members enlisted, in which case they will pick enlisted people to voir dire.

As I said above, summary courts martial are presided over by an officer appointed by the accused's commanding officer. Usually an officer from his own command. Summary courts martial have limits on the punishments they can dispense. Severe limits. And while more formal than non-judicial punishment, is still considered judicial punishment, even with the limitations.

Special and general courts martial can also be presided by a judge alone (and in both cases it will be an actual judge) if the accused requests it. Special courts martial are limited in the punishment they can dispense as well, but not as limited as a summary... you can still get jail time and a punitive discharge.

General courts martial can impose death by firing squad if they so choose. The big difference is that the 12 member jury or panel... whatever... not only decides guilt or innocence, but they also decide the sentence.
MACS Offline
#22 Posted: Thu, Mar 26 2015, 3:04 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,804
Buckwheat wrote:
Check out the big brain on Brad Sarcasm


Meh. I had to do all the paperwork for these things... I was on a small ship, and small ships don't have legal departments like the carriers do. So I did all the reports for non-judicial punishment and summary courts martial. JAG Lawyers and legalmen handle the special/general cases. Bear in mind, I retired 8 years ago... so it's entirely possible things have changed some.

When I was on shore duty, I actually had to bailiff for courts martial and I was subpoenaed to a General as a witness (as well as a character reference... same case!).
Gene363 Offline
#23 Posted: Thu, Mar 26 2015, 3:20 PM EST
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,827
MACS wrote:
Meh. I had to do all the paperwork for these things... I was on a small ship, and small ships don't have legal departments like the carriers do. So I did all the reports for non-judicial punishment and summary courts martial. JAG Lawyers and legalmen handle the special/general cases. Bear in mind, I retired 8 years ago... so it's entirely possible things have changed some.

When I was on shore duty, I actually had to bailiff for courts martial and I was subpoenaed to a General as a witness (as well as a character reference... same case!).


Sounds like you need to go after a law degree. [salute]
Speyside Offline
#24 Posted: Thu, Mar 26 2015, 4:58 PM EST
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Interesting discussion. MACS, you said special and general court martials can be presided over by an actual judge. I am assuming this is a civilian judge, or at there military judges?
DrafterX Offline
#25 Posted: Thu, Mar 26 2015, 5:17 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,557
Prolly get Wapner.... Mellow
MACS Offline
#26 Posted: Thu, Mar 26 2015, 6:33 PM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,804
Speyside wrote:
Interesting discussion. MACS, you said special and general court martials can be presided over by an actual judge. I am assuming this is a civilian judge, or at there military judges?


Real, no BS lawyer judges... from the military JAG corps. Special and General courts ARE presided over by actual judges. A summary has an appointed officer acting as a judge (jury and hammer).
Bitter Klinger Offline
#27 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 12:58 AM EST
Joined: 03-23-2013
Posts: 877
Regardless of judge or panel - there will be no liberal activist judges presiding. He's going to be convicted, dishonorably discharged then sentenced to jail time (though a televised firing squad would be more appropriate, but if we're sparing Hillary, well...whatever)

And yes, watch BHOzo pardon him in less than 2 yrs. as a parting shot at all who honorably served.

It'll happen.
MACS Offline
#28 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 7:58 AM EST
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,804
I served honorably. I don't know the dude, or the circumstances.

I'll let the military courts handle it, and not think much about it. You can't control what happens, BK... but you can control your reaction to it. Don't let it bother you.
DrafterX Offline
#29 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 8:02 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,557
5 soldiers serving honorably are dead because they were out looking for this guy... 5 known terrorists were released in exchange for this guy.... I dunno man... kinda bothers me... Mellow
Bitter Klinger Offline
#30 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 9:51 AM EST
Joined: 03-23-2013
Posts: 877
Macs, you're right to a degree but what about what Drafter just said?

Just becasue there's a process in place doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to hold a keen interest. Actions have consequences, and desertion from a war zone is a high crime. Lately, considering the ways the current leaders have turned everything on its head, its important that this ends like its supposed to - the validity of the military justice system is at stake.

I think I'll probably ignore the story once he's living in Kansas. Where he belongs.
TMCTLT Offline
#31 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 10:05 AM EST
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 19,733
Thunder.Gerbil wrote:
Dude, no one takes the puddle pirate patrol seriously.





I do....had an uncle who served proudly for a lifetime and while he didn't go around shooting and blowing **** up ( like other branches.....what they DO is VERY important to our security. I'd hate like hell to see this branch dissolved.
cacman Offline
#32 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 10:13 AM EST
Joined: 07-03-2010
Posts: 12,216
DrafterX wrote:
5 soldiers serving honorably are dead because they were out looking for this guy... 5 known terrorists were released in exchange for this guy.... I dunno man... kinda bothers me... Mellow

But our POS president is OK with it, so we should too… right?

Susan Rice should be the next hearing on the docket. And she should be in the jail cell next to Bergdahl.
teedubbya Offline
#33 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 10:21 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I think the 5 dead is not true according to the pentagon. There were some injured though.

Stalin wanted all his political opponents jailed too, but then again he had no fear of the next election and the precedent for jailing or killing him.
teedubbya Offline
#34 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 10:22 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Remember when Reagan wanted the line item veto so bad? If he had gotten it the Big O would have it. Talk about a nightmare.
DrafterX Offline
#35 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 10:39 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,557
Big O has Executive Actions... and stuff... Mellow
Thunder.Gerbil Offline
#36 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 10:59 AM EST
Joined: 11-02-2006
Posts: 121,359
TMCTLT wrote:
I do....had an uncle who served proudly for a lifetime and while he didn't go around shooting and blowing **** up ( like other branches.....what they DO is VERY important to our security. I'd hate like hell to see this branch dissolved.


The comment was interservice rivalry.
Burner02 Offline
#37 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 12:42 PM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
DrafterX wrote:
5 soldiers serving honorably are dead because they were out looking for this guy... 5 known terrorists were released in exchange for this guy.... I dunno man... kinda bothers me... Mellow




I could be wrong, but I believe it was six that were KIA while looking for the one that "served with honor and distinction."
Burner02 Offline
#38 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 12:48 PM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
The latest on AL.com:

"Bowe Bergdahl left Afghan post to report wrongdoing, Defense official says"

"A senior Defense Department official told CNN that Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl was captured by the Taliban in Afghanistan after he set out from his unit intending to walk to the nearest U.S. military outpost to report wrongdoing."

"According to the story, Bergdahl didn't believe his commanders would address the issues he had with "order and discipline" in the unit, the official said."



Guess the ones investigating did not get the memo.

Gonz
teedubbya Offline
#39 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 12:56 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
According to the pentagon it was zero Kia searching for him but some were hurt. That could change I suppose but it's the official number. If you trust blogs info more than the pentagons then I hear there were dozens Kia looking for him. He may have killed them himself and bathed in an orgy of their blood.
DrafterX Offline
#40 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 1:06 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,557
teedubbya wrote:
I hear there were dozens Kia looking for him. He may have killed them himself and bathed in an orgy of their blood.



I heard that too..... Mellow
victor809 Offline
#41 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 1:11 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
teedubbya wrote:
If you trust blogs info more than the pentagons....



You just described half the forum.
DrafterX Offline
#42 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 1:13 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,557
I'm wondering how TW managed to hack the Pentagon... Think
TMCTLT Offline
#43 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 1:20 PM EST
Joined: 11-22-2007
Posts: 19,733
Thunder.Gerbil wrote:
The comment was interservice rivalry.



Boyz just beins boyz eh....my ******'s bigger than yours kinda thingy?
Burner02 Offline
#44 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 1:45 PM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
teedubbya wrote:
According to the pentagon it was zero Kia searching for him but some were hurt.



Surely, the media would not lie.


ram27bat
victor809 Offline
#45 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 1:52 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
...why would that apply to the general media, and not whatever blogs are reporting deaths?
Burner02 Offline
#46 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 1:59 PM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
Guess it would depend on what one is reading.
DrafterX Offline
#47 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 2:10 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,557
Fox News is reporting 5 deaths... they're Fair & Balanced... Mellow
victor809 Offline
#48 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 2:25 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
"The media lies, but not the media I believe"
DrafterX Offline
#49 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 2:47 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,557
George Washington..?? Huh
Burner02 Offline
#50 Posted: Fri, Mar 27 2015, 4:40 PM EST
Joined: 12-21-2010
Posts: 12,884
victor809 wrote:
"The media lies, but not the media I believe"



You don't have to confess, most of us already knew that.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Back to Top