Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, June 04, 2014

Did the search for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl cost the lives of American soldiers? A number of the men who served with him have called him a deserter. Some have gone further, blaming him for the deaths of six to eight soldiers. But a review of casualty reports and contemporaneous military logs from the Afghanistan war shows that the facts surrounding the eight deaths are far murkier than definitive -- even as critics of Sergeant Bergdahl contend that every American combat death in Paktika Province in the months after he disappeared, from July to September 2009, was his fault.

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

danni

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

More

A retired senior American military officer who was briefed at the time on the search for Sergeant Bergdahl said that it was "ludicrous" to lay 100 percent of the blame for the deaths at Sergeant Bergdahl's feet, and he acknowledged that patrols were going to get hit in Paktika during fighting season anyway.

But, he said, the reason he and his colleagues are angry is that too often that summer, the purpose of their patrols into dangerous areas was not ordinary wartime work like reconnaissance, maintaining a security presence, or humanitarian projects, but rather "to go look for this guy."

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

I don't know what really happened over there or what crimes Sgt. Bergdahl may have committed or what deaths he may be responsible for but, by the same token, neither do the loud mouth morons who have gone on a rabid attack ever since he was rescued from his Taliban captors. Thoughtful folks might wait until this whole escapade is investigated and the facts uncovered before they try to use it for cheap partisan political points.

#1 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 08:58 AM | Reply | Flag:

even as critics of Sergeant Bergdahl contend that every American combat death in Paktika Province in the months after he disappeared, from July to September 2009, was his fault."

Posted by danni at 08

As Steve Colbert stated: "Bergdhal's return is a great day for America, and I could not be angrier."

#2 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 09:27 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 2

I'm just going with the current status that the Army determined in 2010 that Bergdahl was a deserter. I'm going with the current status that 5 Taliban leaders were released to get him back and are free to walk around in Qatar and carry cell phones to organize meetings with the Taliban in Afghanistan. I'm measuring this current information against the fact that Obama sent Susan Rice out again to lie claiming this soldier served with "honor and distinction" when the Army had already determined he hadn't. So much so that they moved assets to find him and decided a negotiated release was the answer. Why you ask did the Army do this? Because they determined he deserted his country.

#3 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 10:05 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 3

I'm just going with the current status that the Army determined in 2010 that Bergdahl was a deserter.

"Eventually, interrogators will ask Bergdahl about precisely what happened the night he disappeared from his FOB. The Pentagon has never formally completed an investigation into incident.

"There have been several looks into the circumstances surrounding his disappearance but we've never publicly said anything, primarily because we haven't had a chance to speak to Sgt. Bergdahl himself," Warren said."

www.armytimes.com

How can the Army determine anything if the investigation was never formally completed?

#4 | Posted by 726 at 2014-06-04 10:22 AM | Reply | Flag:

#3 | Posted by Dalton

You guys are leading with the need to nail Obama with something. Facts are merely a post hoc concern to you. Facts actually slow you down. Don't insult us by asserting you're interested in what's real here, you've already proven that you do not.

#5 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 10:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

And, since we are talking facts here, DALTON, by now I've read more than one report which contradicts virtually everything you just said. [...]

#6 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 10:25 AM | Reply | Flag:

So far the most significant critique of Obama I've heard is that someone thinks he spent too many beans to get the man back.

You guys are Monday Morning Quarterbacks of the first water.

#7 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 10:30 AM | Reply | Flag:

I'm going with the current status that 5 Taliban leaders were released to get him back and are free to walk around in Qatar and carry cell phones to organize meetings with the Taliban in Afghanistan.

So what? Every time the U.S. launches a drone attack that takes out a senior Al Qaeda leader, people on the right say that it was insignificant because another leader will just take his place. If those leaders are insignificant, these five are insignificant too.

I think Bergdahl had his problems when he was taken hostage. But I didn't know that on the right, "no soldier left behind" meant "no soldier left behind unless he was partially to blame for his capture."

#8 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-04 10:41 AM | Reply | Flag:

WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon concluded in 2010 that Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl walked away from his unit, and after an initial flurry of searching the military curbed any high-risk rescue plans. But the U.S. kept pursuing avenues to negotiate his release, recently seeking to fracture the Taliban network by making its leaders fear a faster deal with underlings could prevent the freedom they sought for five of their top officials, American officials told The Associated Press."

Read it and weep morons. The army concluded the guy is a deserter and Obama had to know this when he sent Susan Rice out to lie and claim he served with "honor and distinction". The Army curbed any high risk rescue plans for the guy. Then Obama traded the Taliban all star team for a guy that didn't even want to be on our team.

#9 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 10:42 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

I think Bergdahl had his problems when he was taken hostage. But I didn't know that on the right, "no soldier left behind" meant "no soldier left behind unless he was partially to blame for his capture."

#8 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-04 10:41 AM | Reply | Flag
I've never said we shouldn't get him back. I just think we gave up too much and Obam obviously thinks so or he wouldn't have told Susan Rice to lie and claim this deserter served with "honor and distinction". Let me ask you guys this. Starting today who do you think would go fight right now for their country? Berdahl or the five guys we traded for him?

#10 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 10:45 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

I would also ask if there is a price too high to get a deserter back?

#11 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 10:48 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Forgive me Rcade if I don't want to trade a deserter for guys that knew on 9-10 that people were going to slaughter Americans on 9-11. I tend to hold a grudge against people like that.

#12 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 10:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

I've never said we shouldn't get him back. I just think we gave up too much ...

So how many Taliban detainees were you willing to release to get him back, President Dalton? Because if your answer is greater than zero, you'd be hammered by the other side and the detainee(s) released would be treated like they were the next Osama bin Laden.

#13 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-04 10:55 AM | Reply | Flag:

"I tend to hold a grudge against people like that."

How about those who were warned that Al Qaeda was going to attack within the United States and did nothing except hide out in Florida?

#14 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 11:00 AM | Reply | Flag:

I am beginning to think Zed is incapable of posting a comment without inserting a strawman.

#15 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 11:02 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Forgive me Rcade if I don't want to trade a deserter for guys that knew on 9-10 that people were going to slaughter Americans on 9-11. I tend to hold a grudge against people like that."

I've noticed several posts by several people saying that these guys knew in advance about the 9-11 attacks but I haven't read that in any of the reporting about them. Do you have a source for this claim ?
These guys were Taliban, not necessarily the same thing as Al Quaeda, in fact, after 9-11 the Taliban offered to turn Bin Laden and Al Quaeda over to a third party nation to be tried.

#16 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 11:08 AM | Reply | Flag:

"The five, who will have to stay in Qatar for a year before going back to Afghanistan, include former ministers in the Taliban government, commanders and one man who had direct ties to the late al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden."

These men were high ranking Taliban government members. At least one knew bin laden personally. To think they would rather take on the United States after 9-11 rather than hand him over to us which we offered and not be told what was happening is foolish. That would be like us launching a attack and the head of the CIA not know about it.

#17 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 11:12 AM | Reply | Flag:

So how many Taliban detainees were you willing to release to get him back, President Dalton? Because if your answer is greater than zero, you'd be hammered by the other side and the detainee(s) released would be treated like they were the next Osama bin Laden.

#13 | Posted by rcade at 2014-06-04 10:55 AM | Reply | Flag

It's not a matter of how many to me as much as who. Would you trade the heads of government for one of their suicide bombers? So, is there a price that's too high for you President Rcade?

#18 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 11:13 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

How many servicemen and women died for elusive WMDS that Gen Powell claimed were definitely there, and not one person including Cheney and Bush who were pushing buttons were held accountable?

How many Americans were held accountable for failing to do their job defending the USA in the WTC and Pentagon and in Boston. No one was held accountable because that opens a big xxxxxxg can of worms that the "Powers That Be" do not want opened. When people are prosecuted it brings discovery, questions and whistle blowers out of the woodwork.

Without a trial how do we know the reason for his capture? In the USA we tend to avoid all major public spectacles of accountability be it Wall St or government.

#19 | Posted by Robson at 2014-06-04 11:14 AM | Reply | Flag:

How about those who were warned that Al Qaeda was going to attack within the United States and did nothing except hide out in Florida?

#14 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 11:00 AM | Reply | Flag

You're pathetic. No one in our government knew a date or method when that briefing was done. How do you feel about Obama handing over guys that went to bed the night before 9-11 knowing that American men, women, and children were going to be slaughtered the next morning? For a guy that walked out on his country.

#20 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 11:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

Maybe President Pajama Boy and Susan Rice shouldn't have tried to make Bergdahl into a hero.

#21 | Posted by visitor_ at 2014-06-04 11:18 AM | Reply | Flag:

Another thing. You Obama supporters are always saying let's see what the investigation brings. Why? Obama never waits. He or his cabinet come out and lie right when the story breaks forming their narrative. Just like in this case claiming Bergdahl served with "honor and distinction" Rice's exact words when we have a Army investigation that says he deserted his country.

#22 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 11:20 AM | Reply | Flag:

"No one in our government knew a date or method when that briefing was done."

"No one could ever have imagined....blah, blah, blah."

I am still waiting for an honest and more complete report about 9-11, I doubt we'll ever see one.

#23 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 11:20 AM | Reply | Flag:

#21 Ya think?

#24 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 11:20 AM | Reply | Flag:

I think this is a lesson to all of us.

Even if you find you disagree with war and find you want nothing to do with it you can still make it worse.

Everything effects everything.

#25 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-06-04 11:22 AM | Reply | Flag:

"That would be like us launching a attack and the head of the CIA not know about it."

In other words, you really don't have any actual proof any of these guys knew anything about the 9-11 attacks before they happened. That's what I thought.

#26 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 11:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

Soldiers who do their duty are heroes. Those who do not, are not heroes.

#27 | Posted by boaz at 2014-06-04 11:25 AM | Reply | Flag:

I am still waiting for an honest and more complete report about 9-11, I doubt we'll ever see one.

#23 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 11:20 AM | Reply | Flag:

You can start a thread Danni. We are talking about Obama trading five highly ranked Taliban figures that knew 9-11 was going to happen for a deserter. It's obvious this was a crap deal otherwise Obama wouldn't have felt the need to lie and claim a deserter served with "honor and distinction". The honest thing (which Obama is not capable of) would be to tell the American people that he traded five Taliban all stars for a guy that didn't want to be on our team anymore but, he felt is was the right thing to do.

#28 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 11:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

With little o doing a victory danc with his release do you realy think birdog will be tried as a diserter much less convicted?

#29 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-06-04 11:28 AM | Reply | Flag:

I am still waiting for an honest and more complete report about 9-11, I doubt we'll ever see one.
#23 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 11:20 AM | Reply | Flag:

I thought Hillary said it didn't matter.

#30 | Posted by visitor_ at 2014-06-04 11:30 AM | Reply | Flag:

In other words, you really don't have any actual proof any of these guys knew anything about the 9-11 attacks before they happened. That's what I thought.

#26 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 11:23 AM | Reply | Flag

No danni I don't have a recording of the meeting but, common sense tells me that since bin laden and al queda was a guest in Afghanistan and their goal was to attack us knowing our response they probably notified government officials of the coming response. One of these Taliban members were the head of intelligence for the Taliban and al queda. Do you honestly think he didn't know 9-11 of was about to happen?

#31 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 11:30 AM | Reply | Flag:

"No danni I don't have a recording of the meeting but, common sense tells me that since bin laden and al queda was a guest in Afghanistan and their goal was to attack us knowing our response they probably notified government officials of the coming response."

Yeah, I'm sure they shared their most top secret plot with everyone they knew. More likely, those who needed to know knew, those who did not did not and I suspect that Taliban especially did not know because they would not have wanted to provoke a war with the United States.

#32 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 11:33 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Bergdahl disappeared on June 30, 2009. A Pentagon investigation concluded in 2010 that the evidence was "incontrovertible" that he walked away from his unit, said a former Pentagon official who has read it.

The military investigation was broader than a criminal inquiry, this official said, and it didn't formally accuse Bergdahl of desertion. In interviews as part of the probe, members of his unit portrayed him as a naive, "delusional" person who thought he could help the Afghan people by leaving his army post, said the official, who was present for the interviews."

You poor saps.

#33 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 11:33 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Thought to be in his early 40s, Wasiq served as the Taliban deputy minister of intelligence and "had direct access to Taliban and Hezb-e-Islami Gulbuddin leadership," according to an internal memo that assessed risk at Guantanamo. He reportedly used his office to support Al Qaeda "and to assist Taliban personnel elude capture."

www.foxnews.com

Not the head of intelligence for both the Taliban and Al Quaeda.

#34 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 11:36 AM | Reply | Flag:

"After weeks of intensive searching, the military decided against making an extraordinary effort to rescue him, especially after it became clear he was being held in Pakistan under the supervision of the Haqqani network, a Taliban ally with links to Pakistani's intelligence service.

Nonetheless, individual units pursued leads as they came in. The Pentagon official familiar with the talks said, "I know for a fact that we lost soldiers looking for him."

Obama and Susan Rice have a strange definition of serving with "honor and distinction".

#35 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 11:36 AM | Reply | Flag:

"You poor saps."

I don't see anyone defending him though you are hoping and praying we will. Most of us just want his case to be handled by an investigation instead of a mob. Put away the pitch forks.

#36 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 11:37 AM | Reply | Flag:

#28 any links to prove your statement that the 5 Taliban prisoners had any prior knowledge of 9/11?

or would you need to drop your pants to reveal the origin of your claim?

#37 | Posted by 503jc69 at 2014-06-04 11:37 AM | Reply | Flag:

I don't see anyone defending him though you are hoping and praying we will. Most of us just want his case to be handled by an investigation instead of a mob. Put away the pitch forks.

#36 | Posted by danni

Ever hear of Corky, Zed or Donnerboy?

#38 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 11:38 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Maybe President Pajama Boy and Susan Rice shouldn't have tried to make Bergdahl into a hero."

that's what is funny to me. They didn't have to parade his parents in front of the camera, claim he "served with honor, etc.."

they could have still done this deal, but chose to keep it as quiet as possible.

But they chose to make this a PR event for themselves.

#39 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 11:40 AM | Reply | Flag:

I am beginning to think Zed is incapable of posting a comment without inserting a strawman.

#15 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 11:02 AM

I have a lot of talents.

Boy did I get dinged above.

#40 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 11:47 AM | Reply | Flag:

But they chose to make this a PR event for themselves.

#39 | Posted by eberly at 2014

Obama had nothing to lose. The Right was going to do what the Right was going to do. Why not project a little pride?

#41 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 11:48 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Put away the pitch forks.

Posted by Danni"

funny. you still drag around a pitch fork with Ronald Reagan's name on it. you got your investigation in to 9-11 and you're not happy with it. You have the largest collection of pitchforks of anybody here.

Bottom line....either value investigations or don't.

#42 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 11:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

#38

I said what Danni said; an investigation rather than the lynching he is getting from our "patriotic" rwingers.

#43 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 11:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Obama had nothing to lose."

in the eyes of his haters and his cheerleaders, he never does.

you have to remember, Zed, that not everyone falls into those 2 groups.

#44 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 11:55 AM | Reply | Flag:

Why not project a little pride?

#41 | Posted by Zed

It was working well until the Bowe's old man busted out the Muslim at the end.

#45 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 11:55 AM | Reply | Flag:

I said what Danni said; an investigation rather than the lynching he is getting from our "patriotic" rwingers.

"Sure......sure....we believe that"

-Edward Snowden

#46 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 11:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

I said what Danni said; an investigation rather than the lynching he is getting from our "patriotic" rwingers.

#43 | Posted by Corky

Really? When did your tune change? Late last night or this morning?

#47 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 11:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

Try to look at the whole picture. We released 5 terrorists. We got hoodwinked again by Susan Rice. We didn't follow the 30 notification rule. We ticked of Feinstein as well as other members of Obama's party who are crawling out of the woodwork. Worst of all, had Bush pulled this, you people would be speaking out of the other side of your faces.
In short, predictable.

#48 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 12:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

"You have the largest collection of pitchforks of anybody here."

Well, if not the largest collection, it's in the top three for sure.

#49 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-04 12:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

#37 I've said I don't have a recording of the meeting but, think about this. The day before the attacks al queda sends two people to kill the leader of the northern alliance. Why would they do that for the Taliban? Because bin laden had someone inform the Taliban what was coming after the 9-11 attacks.

#50 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 12:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

in the eyes of his haters and his cheerleaders, he(Obama) never does.

#44 | Posted by eberly at 2014

When I first heard this story, I thought there would be universal celebration. I fault myself for remaining this naïve. Then again, I had the model of prisoner exchanges in so many wars in mind.

This has just been one more such exchange. We always trade our enemies to get back one of our own. That's the way it works. It's saddening, and maddening, that some are attempting to make it all a disaster on the scale of the Hindenburg.

#51 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

#47

All one has to do is read my posts to find that I called for an investigation multiple times.... or perhaps if you read them the first time.

#48

Look at the picture of the last American prisoner of these wars returned while his medical condition still allowed it.

#52 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 12:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

I don't know what's more disgusting about all this.
The fact this guy leaving his post may have unnecessarily cost lives.
Or the fact these lost lives and a fathers grief is being used for political fodder by ideologically driven commercial sellers and couch potatoes.

#53 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2014-06-04 12:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

One of the reasons I thought there would be universal celebration was the fact the GOP had, so often, stressed Bergdhal's captivity as being a national shame.

Now his return is a national shame.

#54 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

When I first heard this story, I thought there would be universal celebration. I fault myself for remaining this naïve. Then again, I had the model of prisoner exchanges in so many wars in mind.
This has just been one more such exchange. We always trade our enemies to get back one of our own. That's the way it works. It's saddening, and maddening, that some are attempting to make it all a disaster on the scale of the Hindenburg.

#51 | POSTED BY ZED

This deal is getting broad condemnation from all sides, not just from the mean and nasty right.

#55 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 12:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

" you got your investigation in to 9-11 and you're not happy with it."

Yeah, we got a redacted investigation where the President and the Vice President refused to testify under oath. One can only wonder why.

#56 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 12:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

This deal is getting broad condemnation from all sides, not just from the mean and nasty right.

#55 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 12:07

If that's the way it plays out, then I'm glad to be in the minority.

Really glad.

#57 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

Or the fact these lost lives and a fathers grief is being used for political fodder by ideologically driven commercial sellers and couch potatoes.

#53 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses

We're treating it like Iraq. You remember, the war congress authorized that you people can't let go of.

#58 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 12:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

Bowe's old man busted out the Muslim at the end.

#45 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-

One of the American KIAs I personally know from Iraq was a Muslim.

Bright kid. He has a nice, grieving mother.

There's something wrong with you. Perhaps even you sense that.

#59 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:11 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Obama knew the deal sucked when he did it. That's why he had Susan Rice lie to us and claim this soldier served with honor and was captured on the battlefield. They were hoping no one would question such a story. Then people start to remember that the Army determined the guy walked off from his post voluntarily.

#60 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 12:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

I don't see anyone defending him though you are hoping and praying we will. Most of us just want his case to be handled by an investigation instead of a mob. Put away the pitch forks.

#36 | Posted by danni

Ever hear of Corky, Zed or Donnerboy?

#38 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-

Talking about Snowden? ZED's position from the start was bring him home and try him, even offer a plea deal if he cooperates with his debriefing.

If you want to call that pitchforks, have on.

#61 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Try to look at the whole picture. We released 5 terrorists. We got hoodwinked again by Susan Rice. We didn't follow the 30 notification rule. We ticked of Feinstein as well as other members of Obama's party who are crawling out of the woodwork. Worst of all, had Bush pulled this, you people would be speaking out of the other side of your faces."

All true...You know, I watched an interview of Jonathon Turley, leading Constitional Law Professor and Obama supporter, last night and he made the statement that Obama has become what Nixon wanted to be.

In an article headlined with, "Jonathan Turley Obama Supporter: The Left's Cult Personality Disorder Has Everything to Do With Politics"...he says:

"How do cults become cults? The answer is nauseating: Perceived injustices, justifying the taking of what is not yours, promoting him/her who can give you more in exchange for your doing nothing. The end result is hidden from you. You're not smart enough to figure it out. It will be devastating for those whom you are taking from, as well as you, the unjustified taker – but in the end, you the taker, will lose the most. Because of your ignorant support of lawlessness, you are culpable for the downfall of the shining city on the Hill. You are the incredibly stupid victim of a tyrant with a bright smile, a jaunty walk and no fear of baldly lying to the face of the world."

beforeitsnews.com

MAN! Did he nail it or what!? Bravo Zulu and many other praises to you, Johnathon! EVERYBODY, including the Obamites needs to read the whole article.

#62 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-04 12:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obama knew the deal sucked when he did it.

#60 | Posted by Dalton at 2014

What was his motivation for accepting a sucky deal? Really, I'd like to know......

#63 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

There's something wrong with you. Perhaps even you sense that.

#59 | Posted by Zed

I sense you know how far you've over-reached on this one. That's what I sense, Pop.

#64 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 12:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

"You are the incredibly stupid victim of a tyrant with a bright smile, a jaunty walk and no fear of baldly lying to the face of the world."

Don't you KNOW Turley was speaking directly to Corky, Zed, danni, Donnerboy, ChiefTut, Doc, RCade and a host of other DR commandos.

#65 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-04 12:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

I sense you know how far you've over-reached on this one.

#64 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 12:21 PM | Reply

Last time I looked, any American was free to "Bust out Muslim".

Tell us why you have an issue with that.

#66 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

Last time I looked, any American was free to "Bust out Muslim".

Tell us why you have an issue with that.

#66 | Posted by Zed

I'm talking about poo poo'ing trading 5 Terrorists for a Deserter. Try to keep up.

#67 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 12:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

"What was his motivation for accepting a sucky deal?"

LOL...figure it out, Zed, because he knew he could thwart the law, get away with it, and be defended by you and all your little friends..

#68 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-04 12:26 PM | Reply | Flag:


Don't you KNOW Turley was speaking directly to Corky, Zed, danni, Donnerboy, ChiefTut, Doc, RCade and a host of other DR commandos.

#65 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014

You guys are a riot. To the extent Obama is any of these things, you push half and more of the American populace into his arms by being who you are and doing what you do.

#69 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

Turley on politics? Fascinating. It's like Martha Stewart on nuclear fission.

The law in question was just part of the GOP's effort to keep Gitmo open because Obama said it should be closed.

The ODS apparently being a viral infection.

#70 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 12:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

LOL...figure it out, Zed, because he knew he could thwart the law, get away with it, and be defended by you and all your little friends..

#68 | Posted by jestgettinalong

Sorry. I'm failing to see any motive there, DALTON. Just more of the name-calling you substitute for thinking.

#71 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

"You are the incredibly stupid victim of a tyrant with a bright smile, a jaunty walk and no fear of baldly lying to the face of the world."

YEP! If the foo -----, wear it, Zed.

#72 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-04 12:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'm talking about poo poo'ing trading 5 Terrorists for a Deserter. Try to keep up.

#67 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04

Sure, sure. But that's not what I'm talking about.

#73 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

YEP! If the foo -----, wear it, Zed.

#72 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014

Thanks, DALTON. You never disappoint.

#74 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'm with Zed. I've tried to figure out his motivation on this one. I can't especially after he sent Rice out with a script full of lies.

#75 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 12:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

Zed,

Do you realize that you are addressing jestgettingalong as Dalton?

#76 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 12:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

I've tried to figure out his motivation on this one.

#75 | Posted by wisgod at 2014

DALTON strikes again.

#77 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

Do you realize that you are addressing jestgettingalong as Dalton?

#76 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04

Yep. Just did it to WISGOOD also. Now, speculate as to my motivations. Maybe you'll be better at such a task than the various DALTONS are.

#79 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

"MAN! Did he nail it or what!? Bravo Zulu and many other praises to you, Johnathon! EVERYBODY, including the Obamites needs to read the whole article."

Read the transcript of the interview, he never said that part of that blog, that was added by the blogger.

Here is how the interview actually ended:

"I am astonished by the degree of passivity in Congress, particularly by Democrats. You know, I first came to Congress when I was a young page and there were people that fiercely believed in the institution. It didn't matter what party held the White House. But what we're seeing now is the usurpation of authority that's unprecedented in this country.

KELLY: JonathanTurley.org, I recommend it. Thank you so much for being here, sir.

TURLEY: Thank you, Megyn.

www.realclearpolitics.com

#80 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 12:34 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

You OK, Zed?

#81 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 12:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

We have come to the conclusion you'll ALWAYS fail to see any motive, Zed.

#78 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-04 12:32 PM

I'd just like a better response from some of you than "Obama's arrogant and the rest of us are stupid".

Because, you know, I'm arrogant enough to see such nonsense as stupid and tell you.

#82 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

"We're treating it like Iraq. You remember, the war congress authorized that you people can't let go of."

You people?
And do you mean the "Iraq" that cost us 2 trillion with zero return for the dollars spent?

Anyway, I never chanted "Fifty Years to Judge"! That was all you, fool.

#84 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2014-06-04 12:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

So, let's re-set, DALTONS:

What was Obama's conscious motivation for accepting a deal that sucks? Most people, not you apparently, look to what Obama thought he was getting from it.

But if you'd like to continue being unique, we all know I can't stop you.

#85 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I'm with Zed. I've tried to figure out his motivation on this one."

C'mon Wis, I know you're smarter than Zed. How about diverting attention from V.A.Gate? How about first step in closing Guantanamo (much easier now with worst guys gone,) How about he now says the war is over and he ended it (even though nobody has stopped shooting) and a multitude of other motives (just because he CAN.) Of course, he also knew Zed and his crew would buy Susan Rice's BS, and "What difference does it make?"

#86 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-04 12:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

"What was Obama's conscious motivation for accepting a deal that sucks?"

maybe we decided that we no longer needed to keep those guys in jail but Obama would be attacked for just letting go for the hell of it.....instead we exchanged them. Sounds like a good reason....get one of ours back. The deal with Qutar to hold them for a year sounded reasonable enough to get rid of them.

possible maybe?

#87 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 12:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

Jest, you think the price he'll pay politically was worth that? Nevermind. I forgot we're talking about Obama. The only thing he can plan ahead for is the next club on the golf course.

#88 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 12:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

How about diverting attention from V.A.Gate?

#86 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-04

Always interesting to see how someone else's mind works.

Um, you think that VA thing is really going away because of Bergdhal?

Furthermore, If all Obama wanted to do was distract someone, even you could have thought up at least one-hundred better ways.

As a mental exercise, why don't you?

#89 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

Sorry Zed sometimes I have to work. My theory is that Obama can't close Gitmo so the next best thing is to try and get rid of as many of it's prisoners as he can. The fact that he could get a deserter back in the process was a bonus. Now answer my question as to why Obama would lie (which you pretend to care so much about) to the American people when they claimed Bergdahl served honorably with distinction? Why not just tell the truth?

#90 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 12:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

So, let me get this straight....Obama consciously arranges a SUCKY deal because, as well all are taught in grade schools, SUCKY deals provide so much political cover for so many other SUCKY things?

#91 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

That's pretty funny, Zed, asking them to think.

It appears to be a new experience for which they are not quite prepared.

#92 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 12:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

My theory is that Obama can't close Gitmo so the next best thing is to try and get rid of as many of it's prisoners as he can.

#90 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 12:44

Why wouldn't he just leave it to the next president? It would be funny if President Cruz got handed it.

#93 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

Hey Dr. Frist how is Bergdahl doing?

#94 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 12:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

That's pretty funny, Zed, asking them to think.

It appears to be a new experience for which they are not quite prepared.

#92 | Posted by Corky

Is this your definition of quality contributions to the topic?

#95 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 12:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

American people when they claimed Bergdahl served honorably with distinction?

#90 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 12:44 PM | Rep

That's the posture of the US Army as we speak, son. This could change, now that we have the man back.

Or Bergdhal could be handed a POW medal and left to enjoy retirement.

#96 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

Even if only one death occurred looking for someone who left his post intentionally and went awol then he should have been left with the Taliban.

We do know he mailed his things home before he went awol.

From the NY Times:

"We know he left a note in his tent saying he had become disillusioned with the Army, did not support the American mission in Afghanistan and was leaving to start a new life. He slipped off the remote military outpost in Paktika Province on the border with Pakistan and took with him a soft backpack, water, knives, a notebook and writing materials, but left behind his body armor and weapons -- startling, given the hostile environment around his outpost…"

Now go ahead democrat, honor him in the Rose Garden, Give him a party, release terrorists to get him back, and tell us he's a hero. Thats what communist do they hate America while loving a traitor.

#97 | Posted by mcmlcxx at 2014-06-04 12:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

What was his motivation for accepting a sucky deal? Really, I'd like to know......

#63 | POSTED BY ZED

This is what I think:

The administration felt they had an opportunity to bring home an imprisoned soldier. They thought the deal was a no-brainer and that it would be a big win politically. I don't think they thought the deal was 'sucky' (sic) at all.

Here's what they failed to grasp:

*While they apparently don't think it's a big deal to release 5 Taliban super-stars much of the public does, including members of their own party.

*They didn't think it was a problem negotiating with terrorist groups even though our policy on the issue is clear.

*They had no problem circumventing the 30-day notice law. They circumvent law all of the time as a matter of M.O. What is one more lawless act to this administration?

*Being utterly clueless as to military culture and code, they didn't think it was a big deal that this guy was a deserter. Worse, they failed to realize the degree of resentment the military has for this guy particularly given the fact that 6 far better men lost their lives trying to free this deserter from captivity.

*They gave a hero's welcome to a man wholly unworthy of such treatment.

*They sent Susan Rice on the Sunday show circuit to lionize a deserter.

*They are so accustomed to the MSM circling the wagons for them that they failed to realize that doing so in this case was impossible as this guy's story was already out there.

It's the sum of all of the above bullet points that is causing so much backlash, Zed. I think you are struggling with this because you falsely believe that all of the criticisms are coming from the right. And because you have such a strong hatred for the right it causes you to believe that the motivations behind the criticisms are nefarious.

The reason you are so astounded by the strength and volume of this backlash is rooted in your own personal prejudice.

#98 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 12:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

Why wouldn't he just leave it to the next president? It would be funny if President Cruz got handed it.

#93 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:47 PM | Reply | Flag

Because I really think he wants to close it. I don't blame him for that. People have different views on closing it. Now why would Obama lie about the Bergdahls actions in the war? When we all have a public report that the Army determined he simply quit and walked away from his unit.

#99 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 12:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yep. Just did it to WISGOOD also. Now, speculate as to my motivations. Maybe you'll be better at such a task than the various DALTONS are.

#79 | POSTED BY ZED

Now that I know it's deliberate, the motivation is obvious.

#100 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 12:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

Because I really think he wants to close it.

#99 | Posted by Dalton at 2014

Sorry, I just find that incredibly weak.

#101 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

That's the posture of the US Army as we speak, son. This could change, now that we have the man back.

Or Bergdhal could be handed a POW medal and left to enjoy retirement.

#96 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

No it's not. They determined that the would no longer risk lives trying to find him after it was determined he quit and decided to leave his post. His unit commander claims that after he left that IED attacks increased and were more effective.

#102 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 12:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Now that I know it's deliberate, the motivation is obvious.

#100 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04

I'm just trying to distract from the scandal at the VA.

#103 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

#80 | POSTED BY DANNI

Are you picking the fly ---- out of the pepper, danni? Are you saying Turley is a supporter of Obama and doesn't think you and the rest of the far left are a cult? And yes, you and your little friends fit every description here. Now you have Nixon in the White House and you love it...go figure.

"JONATHAN TURLEY: Well, I think that the biggest problem we have is that the system itself, if we have a dominant branch, simply begins to shut down in terms of the safeguards. People don't seem to understand that the separation of powers is not about the power of these branches, it's there to protect individual liberty, it's there to protect us from the concentration of power. That's what is occurring here. You know, I've said it before, Barack Obama is really the president Richard Nixon always wanted to be. You know, he's been allowed to act unilaterally in a way that we've fought for decades."

#104 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-04 12:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

They determined that the would no longer risk lives trying to find him after it was determined he quit and decided to leave his post.

#102 | Posted by Dalton

Who? The Department of the Army? The Joint Chiefs? Chuck Hagel? Mickey Mouse?

#105 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

Sorry, I just find that incredibly weak.

#101 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

?

#106 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 12:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

His unit commander claims that after he left that IED attacks increased and were more effective.

#102 | Posted by Dalton at

His unit commander can testify at his Court Martial.

You have to see the flaw in what you're doing.

#107 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

Who? The Department of the Army? The Joint Chiefs? Chuck Hagel? Mickey Mouse?

#105 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

Jesus you are either stupid or really good at playing dumb. The Army concluded the guy was a deserter in 2010 and then the Army decided they would no longer send Army personnel on risky missions that would jeopordize Army personnell's lives for a deserter. Now do you know who?

#108 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 12:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

?

#106 | Posted by Dalton at

It doesn't make any sense. Five less prisoners closes nothing.

Gitmo will be open in 2018. Hillary will take care of it. That should make you happy. I don't really think you want that Paul boy involved.

#109 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Are you picking the fly ---- out of the pepper, danni?"

I'm just cluing you in that what you posted wasn't what Turley said. Now, what you should be asking yourself is how did I know that? Because Turley, though I might disagree with him on his view about Obama, isn't an over the top type of writer and that last portion of that blog was way over the top and not the type of statement Turley would make. I do though, understand Turley's fear but in the face of the worst obstructionism in my lifetime I think the President came to a point that he has a job to do and can't allow the Republican obstructionists stop him from doing it, as was the case with Bergdahl.

#110 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 12:57 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

I'm just trying to distract from the scandal at the VA.

#103 | POSTED BY ZED

I thought you were trying to distract from Benghazi. :-)

#111 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 12:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

lol, Turley is a SC justice wannbe who never will be and who has consistently attacked anyone, lib or con, who he felt stepped across the line from the Exec branch onto "his" judicial turf.

That Jest found a shiny new object to to distract himself is just plain funny.

#112 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 12:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

I see Zed is using his Scott Walker recall arguements again.

#113 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 12:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

The Army concluded the guy was a deserter in 2010

#108 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 12:56 PMFlag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

I've read recent statements by the Army that assert that Bergdhal's reputation is clear at this moment.

So, no, I'm not being stupid. I'm just attempting to see where you get that whole "lie" thing.

Logic intervenes at this point. Why would Obama instruct anyone to lie about any fact which is so easily checked, by virtually anyone?

His motivations? Maybe lying distracts from the VA?

#114 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 01:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

"That's pretty funny, Zed, asking them to think."

Turley is a leading Constitutional Law professor. He kinda states the situation along the lines we think. We know YOU and your little friends rely more upon Susan Rice and Jay Carney for info so it's easy to understand why you'd have a different idea of what "thinking" entails.

#115 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-04 01:02 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

well OF COURSE IT IS...

and the democrat plan continues..

deny deny deny deflect....

couple of years and then it's

what difference does it make...

OR..

DUDE..that was like two years ago..

aha ha ha...'you people' are so easy...

#116 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-06-04 01:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Turley is a SC justice wannbe who never will be and who has consistently attacked anyone, lib or con, who he felt stepped across the line from the Exec branch onto "his" judicial turf."

Of course, OF COURSE! The REAL leading constitutional Law professor is in the White House, the guy who NEVER steps over any lines, right, Corky? You are a real fit...LOLOLOL

#117 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-04 01:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

you'd have a different idea of what "thinking" entails.

#115 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-04 01:02 PMFlag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

I do have a different view of what thinking entails. Relative to you.

Someone in the Army "concluded" Bergdhal is a deserter? Is this really all you've got? Because, you know, I'd at least like to know who that someone was.

Another example of how we think differently.

#118 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 01:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'm sure any investigation involving this Admin will not be concluded until after the statute of Limitations expires on deserting.

#119 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 01:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

"That Jest found a shiny new object to to distract himself is just plain funny."

That he didn't know which parts of a blog were actually comments by Turley and which weren't and then used it in a post believing he had found a real gem of an insult for libs was hilarious!

#120 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 01:08 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

but in the face of the worst obstructionism in my lifetime I think the President came to a point that he has a job to do and can't allow the Republican obstructionists stop him from doing it, as was the case with Bergdahl.

#110 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 12:57 PMFlag: | Newsworthy 1

Im sorry for the 'old jokes' I've told on you...apparently you weren't even born during the "BUSH" years when democrats blocked EVEN HISpanics...

LOL

and your comment makes NO DIFFERENCE and isn't even relevant...

THIS POTUS IGNORED the rule of law......again,.

#121 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-06-04 01:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I've read recent statements by the Army that assert that Bergdhal's reputation is clear at this moment."

I googled that and all that pops up is what Susan Rice said. What, exactly, did the Army say?

#122 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 01:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

"is causing so much backlash"

The only "backlash" this seems to be creating is the one for the ideologically deranged.

$20 bucks says you will be here in a months' time repeating the "before anyone says I have egg on my face" meme

#123 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2014-06-04 01:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Someone in the Army "concluded" Bergdhal is a deserter? "

Someone in the ARmy concluded that Bergdahl served with distinction and honor, too.

could the truth be somewhere in between? that he served with honor and distinction....right up to the point where we believe he deserted. (note...I didn't say he actually deserted)

#124 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 01:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

So, no, I'm not being stupid. I'm just attempting to see where you get that whole "lie" thing.
Logic intervenes at this point. Why would Obama instruct anyone to lie about any fact which is so easily checked, by virtually anyone?

It's because Susan Rice wasn't technically lying. To say that he served with 'honor and distinction' isn't a lie, it's a gross mis-characterization. It's more of an opinion, actually.

It would be like Babbles saying "George W. Bush was a great president".

It's a grossly inaccurate statement, and it's even kind of funny to call it a lie. But it isn't a lie. It's an opinion. It's a characterization.

As I see it, there are only 2 explanations for Rice's characterization, and both are disturbing:

1. The administration truly believes this guy served with honor and distinction.

2. The motivations behind this deal were political, so the administration decided to mischaracterize this guy and thought that the public would be too stupid to notice.

#125 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 01:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

"To say that he served with 'honor and distinction' isn't a lie, it's a gross mis-characterization. It's more of an opinion, actually."

no, Zed claims the army has said that. So, which is it.....did Rice just claim that or did she quote officials from the Army when she said "honor and distinction"??

#126 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 01:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I googled that and all that pops up is what Susan Rice said. What, exactly, did the Army say?"

They said; He was promotion twice since his capture

#128 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2014-06-04 01:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

What, exactly, did the Army say?

#122 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 01:08 PMFlag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

The Stars and Stripes said that there was an Article-15 investigation in regards to Bergdhal's absence, but the results are classified.

One assumes that Obama could read a classified report. So, you've got two broad options for what that report said. One might be politically inconvenient for Obama, but the other would make some of you look like tools.

Obama's motivation for consciously lying about a document he knows may well see the light of day sooner than later? Beuhler?

But let's start by acknowledging that none of you right-wing wackos can see this document like Obama can. Just the truth. Therefore, anything you have to say on the subject is just a nasty little guess. or, if you will, a lie.

#129 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 01:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

"They said; He was promotion twice since his capture"

That's nothing, we had another deserter make it all the way to the Presidency.

#130 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 01:19 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

They said; He was promotion twice since his capture

#128 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2014-06-04 01

Which is what I read. So now you have some clue as to what's in that classified AR-15.

Nothing.

#131 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 01:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

I heard it was 12 soldiers.

#132 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-04 01:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

Don't call Clinton a deserter, Danni. He was a draft-dodger. It's not the same thing.

#133 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 01:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

I just think we gave up too much

Considering the blowback that Obama is getting, he should have traded for every .amn taliban at Gitmo. He would have been that much closer to closing down Gitmo.

#134 | Posted by FedUpWithPols at 2014-06-04 01:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

#133 |

www.awolbush.com

#135 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 01:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

Gitmo will be open in 2018. Hillary will take care of it. That should make you happy. I don't really think you want that Paul boy involved.

#109 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 12:57 PM | Reply | Flag

I didn't say it wouldn't. It can't close until Khaleid Sheik Mohammed is convicted and executed. Now answer my question why would Obama lie about the deserters actions when he quit and left his unit?

#136 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 01:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

"But let's start by acknowledging that none of you right-wing wackos.."

are you talking to me?

no....surely not.

#137 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 01:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

Someone in the Army "concluded" Bergdhal is a deserter? Is this really all you've got? Because, you know, I'd at least like to know who that someone was.

Another example of how we think differently.

#118 | Posted by Zed at 2

are you COMPLETELY DAFT ???

the people saying he deserted were people in THE NEXT COT and tent or barracks.....just this morning his SQUAD LEADER called him a deserter and called out the secretary of defense as a liar....

#138 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-06-04 01:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

I agree FEDUP...we got a bad deal...we should have traded all the taliban at GITMO. The rest should charged and be put on trial or released if there is nothing to charge them with... Then we could finally close that sad chapter in our history.

#139 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-06-04 01:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

Zed,

so the army didn't actually say "he served with honor and distinction"

that was Rice's assertion?

#140 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 01:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

"They said; He was promotion twice since his capture"

That's nothing, we had another deserter make it all the way to the Presidency.

#130 | Posted by danni at 2

oh YEAH that's right...

wait a minute....wasn't that the story that got Rather and producer FIRED because it was a LIE ?????

oh shoot.. never mind...that 'dont make no difference no ways'...

#141 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-06-04 01:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

"THIS POTUS IGNORED the rule of law......again,."

So when is Obama going to be impeached? It's been 96 hours since the announcement of Bergdahl's release. If Republicans don't get moving on this, they'll share the blame when Obama does something else they deem against the law.

#142 | Posted by DCTexan at 2014-06-04 01:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

#139

I'd prefer we just have an "accidental" fire at Gitmo that takes care of them.

#143 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 01:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

"He was a draft-dodger. It's not the same thing."

he's also been disbarred, impeached, and has been accused of being an serial adulterer and rapist.

just thought i'd throw a little more salt in that wound....

:-)

#144 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 01:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

"THIS POTUS IGNORED the rule of law......again,."

So when is Obama going to be impeached? It's been 96 hours since the announcement of Bergdahl's release. If Republicans don't get moving on this, they'll share the blame when Obama does something else they deem against the law.

#142 | Posted by DCTexan at 2014

gop base is too cowardly for doing the "RIGHT THING" ....

#145 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-06-04 01:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

"wait a minute....wasn't that the story that got Rather and producer FIRED because it was a LIE ?????"

Not because it was untrue just that he didn't have the actual documents he believed he had.

When Bergdahl "deserted" where did he go? .... Benghazi?????

#146 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 02:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

"he's also been disbarred, impeached, and has been accused of being an serial adulterer and rapist. "

And still left the Presidency with an overwhelming popularity rating.

#147 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-04 02:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

When Bergdahl "deserted" where did he go? .... Benghazi?????

#146 | Posted by danni

A Taliban Toilet according to Corky.

#148 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 02:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

-"THIS POTUS IGNORED the rule of law......again,."

An opinion, one among many, not a fact as some like to say.

"The argument doesn't end there, however. What if the law in question is itself unconstitutional? After all, the president of the United States is also the nation's commander in chief under the Constitution (Article II, Section 2, Clause I).

That invests him with enormous military powers, particularly in regards to tactical and strategic decisions. What if Congress passed a law requiring a 30-day notice before a president could order troops to patrol? That would pretty clearly be unconstitutional. Some analysts argue that a decision to repatriate a captured soldier isn't much different.

"The President pretty clearly exercised his constitutional powers under Article II to disregard the statute," writes Harvard Law School professor Jack Goldsmith at the "Lawfare" national security legal blog."

www.csmonitor.com

#149 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 02:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

-according to Corky.

According to the recording made at the time by the insurgents.

You can stop lying any time now.

#150 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 02:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

#149 | POSTED BY CORKY

He violated the law. That is not even in dispute.

The question then becomes, does the law place an unconstitutional constraint on the CiC. I don't think it does, but I certainly understand the argument and don't find the argument to be a stretch.

#151 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 02:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

HEY HAVE YOU NOTICED A CHANCE,....

remember back in the GOOD OLE DAYS..............

when a woman named SHEEHAN said any thing she wanted about what bush did and didn't do... .....and EVERY LIB HERE fell right into line like the little drones they are and were...

what ever happened to those folks anyway ???

#152 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-06-04 02:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

-That is not even in dispute.

That's a semantic game.

The validity of the law is in dispute.

#153 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 02:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

Zed took off and he didn't answer my question to clarify exactly who claimed Bergdahl served with honor and distinction. Were those Rice's words or the Army's?

#154 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 02:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

And still left the Presidency with an overwhelming popularity rating.

#147 | Posted by danni at 2

just a testament to the low information voter who got this lying so and so re elected....it's not really a badge to wear proudly ....course it's the same party as the former KKK members and murdering elite teddy ...so it's really not a surprise..

#155 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-06-04 02:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

he validity of the law is in dispute.

#153 | Posted by Corky at 2014-0

AAAAAHHHHHHAAAAAAAA ha ha

NO IT"S NOT !!!

oh wow...so now you're in THIS area of GRIEF.....

oh man this was funny stuff.

#156 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-06-04 02:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

i will say this though for all you bigot fox haters...

YESTERDAY....both krauthammer AND steven whats his name said they thought

he could manipulate things to where it wasn't QUITE as an afront to the constitution as many were saying.....so GLAD you're in line with those two.....

#157 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-06-04 02:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

Were those Rice's words or the Army's?

#154 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 02:20 PMFlag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

It's Rice's. The Army knew the truth and concluded in a 2010 report that he walked off post and quit on his fellow soldiers. They were so certain of this that the Army decided not to put soldiers lives at risk performing missions to rescue him.

#158 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 02:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

#156

Decisions, decisions.... who to believe on the law?

BL2 or Harvard Law School professor Jack Goldsmith?

#159 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 02:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

Zed rarely answers questions, Ebs. Particularly if they are questions that put him or those he supports in a potentially difficult spot.

#160 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 02:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

The Army knew the truth and concluded in a 2010 report that he walked off post and quit on his fellow soldiers. They were so certain of this that the Army decided not to put soldiers lives at risk performing missions to rescue him.

#158 | Posted by Dalton

I've see you've decided to follow the way of Crap.

Ordinary, current, verified information has little power in the World of Crap.

#161 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 02:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

I know Jeff. He has tried to frame it as though the Army found Bowe to be just a wonderful guy.

#162 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 02:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

#161 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 02:44 PM | Reply | Flag: crap

#163 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 02:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

By Associated Press, Published: June 2


WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon concluded in 2010 that Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl walked away from his unit, and after an initial flurry of searching the military curbed any high-risk rescue plans. But the U.S. kept pursuing avenues to negotiate his release, recently seeking to fracture the Taliban network by making its leaders fear a faster deal with underlings could prevent the freedom they sought for five of their top officials, American officials told The Associated Press.

#164 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 02:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's right there in #164 moron. YOu don't even need to read the whole post. Just the first part where it says "The Pentagon concluded in 2010 that Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl walked away from his unit". He received is upgrades b/c of lenght of service not quality of service. He may have been a fine soldier prior to walking away but, that doesn't change the fact that he did.

#165 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 02:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

- walked away from his unit".

Is not desertion unless an intent to never return is proven in court.

Ask GW. He's an expert on the subject, having deserted his unit for over a year.

#166 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 02:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Ask GW"

just run away, child. It's clear you don't want to talk about Bowe anymore.

#167 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 02:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

#164 | Posted by Dalton at 2014

DALTON, the crap is not in the article you adduce, its in the way you use it.

"Walked away" can mean anything at this point, one possibility being desertion. I can think of five other reasons.

You're trying much too hard. Because you do, it makes you dishonest.

#168 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 03:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

Feel free to go start a thread on it moron.

#169 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 03:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

"It's right there in #164 moron".

If the man walked away secondary to mental illness, Moron, as just one example-----That's not a good thing at all, but it doesn't help you, or your case. It would make you look like a pig.

#170 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 03:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

What is dishonest is to say the man served with honor and distinction as Susan Rice claimed. Knowing the Army figured out he quit prior to being captured.

#171 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 03:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obama expressed an opinion regarding Bergdahl based on what is honestly known concerning him at this moment. He didn't lie.

Even if the sergeant is later court-martialed and convicted, still no one in the WH lied. You're substituting your fantasies for facts.

#172 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 03:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

maybe we decided that we no longer needed to keep those guys in jail but Obama would be attacked for just letting go for the hell of it.....instead we exchanged them. Sounds like a good reason....get one of ours back. The deal with Qutar to hold them for a year sounded reasonable enough to get rid of them.

Absolutely plausible.

[T]he U.S. would not be able to hold them forever. Indeed, it is likely that the U.S. would be required, as a matter of international law, to release them shortly after the end of 2014, when U.S. combat operations cease in Afghanistan. The Administration appears to have reached a defensible, hold-your-nose compromise by arranging, in exchange for the release of Sergeant Bergdahl, for the individuals to be held in Qatar for a year before they return to Afghanistan.
...
[T]he Taliban leaders' backgrounds demonstrate that it would have been legally difficult, if not impossible, to prosecute them in federal courts -- as many human rights groups have urged -- because U.S. criminal statutes did not apply to their activities in Afghanistan and because the U.S. military had not collected evidence about them that would have been admissible in federal court. And, if the Taliban had actually been treated as POWs under the Geneva Conventions (for which there has always been a good argument), they would have had to be prosecuted in a military court, not a civilian court, pursuant to Article 102 of the Third Geneva Convention.
www.lawfareblog.com

#173 | Posted by et_al at 2014-06-04 03:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

He was first spotted by locals in a village a half a mile away. I wouldn't assume he was coming back and neither did the Army.

#174 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 03:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Bowe Bergdahl left a note saying he had gone to start a 'new life' and a former comrade broke his military gagging order today to tell MailOnline of the jaw-dropping moment he discovered the Taliban POW had walked off from their Afghanistan base.

That revelation came just hours before two top government officials confirmed that there will be a new, full investigation into Bergdahl's disappearance.

The soldier, who requested anonymity as he is still in the military, said: ‘Everyone looked at me like I was crazy but I was right, he had walked off.'

The New York Times reported Bergdahl also left behind a note in which he said he did not want to fight for America any more, did not believe in the war - and was leaving to start a new life."

Does that sound like he was coming back zed? He's going to go start a new life and then come back to the Army one day?

#175 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 03:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

Interesting

Revealed: Hunt for Bowe Bergdahl left troops unprotected in infamous Afghan battle that left EIGHT U.S. soldiers dead and 22 wounded and produced two Medal of Honor recipients

Just 53 U.S. soldiers were left to defend an ammunition depot with no air support or reserves on Oct. 3, 2009, after nearly 350 Taliban attacked a combat outpost and 35 Afghan National Army soldiers fled their posts
Sources tell MailOnline that 8 U.S. soldiers died and 22 were wounded because additional troops and air cover were diverted to hunt for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl

www.dailymail.co.uk

#176 | Posted by paneocon at 2014-06-04 03:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

What is dishonest is to say the man served with honor and distinction as Susan Rice claimed.

#171 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06

You want to hang Obama with something so damned badly, don't you? Ordinary fairness and sober logic don't impress you.

You want to impeach someone over this sophomoric nonsense? As someone else said: Bring it on.

#177 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 03:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

This was an excellent deal. We get an american back and the NSA will tap these guys till they die to see where they lead us. They may have been chipped.

The american will eventually share his experience of 5 years of eating and sleeping with these guys which is invaluable.

You guys who are only looking at politics are fools and that is why americans are being spied on by our own country.

#178 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2014-06-04 03:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

Does that sound like he was coming back zed?

#175 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 03:28 PM |

You're missing the point; you have missed the point. As of this moment Bergdhal's record is officially clean.

Did you want Rice to lie and say something else?

Jeez. Why don't you get on TV and regale the country with what you think things "sound like"?

#179 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 03:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

The only one mentioning impeachment over Rice's remarks is you, Zed.

#180 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 03:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

#179

I know. She was just using talking points written by the CIA, or whatever.

#181 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 03:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

I know. She was just using talking points written by the CIA, or whatever.

#181 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014

She was stating the literal truth, and not the spin you wanted her to say.

Cry me a river.

#182 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 04:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

They may have been chipped.

good eye...I was wondering about that possibility, too. Perfect opportunity to follow them to the "source" and drone the crap out of em.

#183 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-06-04 04:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

As of this moment Bergdhal's record is officially clean.

Nowhere within his record does it say that he served honorably and with distinction, nor was that even remotely akin to the opinion of his C.O. Quite the contrary.

#184 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 04:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

Nowhere within his record does it say that he served honorably and with distinction, nor was that even remotely akin to the opinion of his C.O. Quite the contrary.

#184 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04

1) His C.O. hasn't said anything under oath that I'm aware of.

2) "Honorably and with distinction"-----I haven't seen this man's full file. Neither have you. For all either of us know he did a sterling job right up to the moment he went gone.

I'd personally like to see his commendations and decorations. I don't know for certain, but its a fair bet that they are there.

Not a problem for me if they are. It will be up to you to argue your meaninglessness at that point.

#185 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 04:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

She was stating the literal truth,

That was not the 'literal truth'. Nothing within his record indicated serving honorably and with distinction.

She was being dishonest. That's not a crime in DC and is often rewarded.

I don't know why you can't just admit that. She was trying to put the best possible spin on this. Again, politics as usual.

Your fierce defense of her comments is bizarre.

#186 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 04:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

It will be up to you to argue THEIR meaninglessness at that point.

#185 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 04:05

I'm used to Republicans explaining why war decorations don't mean anything.

#187 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 04:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

Nothing within his record indicated serving honorably and with distinction.

#186 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04

Hey, Buddy. Just point me to the man's service record. I'd like to read it, too.

#188 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 04:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

1) His C.O. hasn't said anything under oath that I'm aware of.

Susan Rice wasn't under oath either. That doesn't change the fact that her characterization of his service is directly at odds with his C.O. and those who served with him.

#189 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 04:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

I don't know why you can't just admit that.

#186 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014

Because it would be as stupid and dishonest as you asserting that you've read this man's service record. Which is the meaning I take from your remarks.

You care to admit that you have not?

#190 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 04:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

That doesn't change the fact that her characterization of his service is directly at odds with his C.O. and those who served with him.

#189 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04

The can all say it under oath, buddy, and for the record. You have a really bad case of Swiftboating.

#191 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 04:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

"You have a really bad case of Swiftboating."

My God, every obamabot here is in need of therapy.

look at the crap they are still dragging around.

too much baggage.

#192 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 04:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I'm used to Republicans explaining why war decorations don't mean anything."

I'm used to partisan cheerleaders pretending military service means anything.

#193 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 04:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

The can all say it under oath, buddy, and for the record. You have a really bad case of Swiftboating.

#191 | POSTED BY ZED

If this goes to a Court Martial they probably will.

The fact is they are saying it now. Do you think they are lying?

#194 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 04:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

Can Bowe Bergdahl Be Tied to 6 Lost Lives? Facts Are Murky

But a review of casualty reports and contemporaneous military logs from the Afghanistan war shows that the facts surrounding the eight deaths are far murkier than definitive -- even as critics of Sergeant Bergdahl contend that every American combat death in Paktika Province in the months after he disappeared, from July to September 2009, was his fault.

All across Afghanistan, that period was a time of ferocious fighting. President Obama had decided to send a surge of additional troops to improve security, but they had not yet arrived. In Paktika, the eight deaths during that period were up from five in the same three months the previous year. Across Afghanistan, 122 Americans died in that period, up from 58 in 2008.

Two soldiers died during the most intense period of the search after Sergeant Bergdahl's June 30 disappearance. Both were inside an outpost that came under attack, not out patrolling and running checkpoints looking for him. The other six soldiers died in late August and early September.

Facts are often obscured in the fog of the battlefield, witnesses have incomplete vantage points and the events are five years in the past now. But an archive of military reports logging significant activities in America's war in Afghanistan offers a contemporaneous written record of events in Paktika that summer. The archive was made public by Chelsea Manning, formerly known as Pvt. Bradley Manning, who is serving a 35-year prison sentence for the leak.

more

www.nytimes.com

#195 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 04:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

"The President pretty clearly exercised his constitutional powers under Article II to disregard the statute," writes Harvard Law School professor Jack Goldsmith at the "Lawfare" national security legal blog."

The full Goldsmith article: The President Pretty Clearly Disregarded a Congressional Statute in Swapping GTMO Detainees for Bergdahl

Follow up article he wrote on the subject: The Administration's New (and Unconvincing) Reading of the Notice Requirement for GTMO transfers

Bottom line, this goes nowhere. The President will not be impeached nor will he be sued. All that happens is a gaggle of partisan cretins will rant and rave until some new partisan red meat is thrown out for them to turn their attention to.

#196 | Posted by et_al at 2014-06-04 04:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Lynch 'em first and ask questions... never!"

It's the Rwinger Way.

#197 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 04:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

Zed doesn't care. He like Obama is all about the political win. Bergdahl will never face a court martial or not in the near future b/c it would hurt Obama politically. Watch a month from now this will die down and no one will cover it except fox news and their defense will be that nobody cares. It's their go to play.

#198 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 04:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

Oops. A U.S. Official?????

The Haqqani terrorist group kept Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl in relatively good health the past five years because it was always its goal to trade him, U.S. officials said Tuesday.

But the last "proof-of-life" video the Haqqani network recorded showed Sgt. Bergdahl looking haggard and perhaps bruised. One U.S. official said intelligence analysts believe the soldier may have been made to look ill as a ploy to convince Washington he was in failing health and needed to be freed promptly. The video was produced in December and obtained by U.S. military in January.

Read more: www.washingtontimes.com

#199 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-04 04:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

Zed doesn't care. He like Obama is all about the political win. Bergdahl will never face a court martial or not in the near future b/c it would hurt Obama politically.

That will be the interesting part of all this. So many soldiers are all saying the same thing - he deserted. I have yet to see a single comment contradicting this allegation.

Obama may not take desertion seriously, but the Army definitely does and it's an institution that long predates Obama.

So, what does the administration do if a Court Martial takes place? Does he stand idly by and let the chips fall where they may KNOWING that if this guy is found guilty of desertion (or worse) that it will hurt him politically? Or does the administration go into damage control and attempt to thwart the process?

I guess we'll find out soon enough.

#200 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 04:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Two soldiers died during the most intense period of the search after Sergeant Bergdahl's June 30 disappearance. Both were inside an outpost that came under attack, not out patrolling and running checkpoints looking for him. The other six soldiers died in late August and early September."

Repeatable.

#201 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 04:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

-I have yet to see a single comment contradicting this allegation.

Desertion is a legal term, something that has to be proven in court and even then requires there be proof that the soldier would never return.

What you speak of is leaving his post, possibly AWOL, no more without a trial.

Not that facts matter in a public lynching.

#202 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 04:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

"So, what does the administration do if a Court Martial takes place?"

get an attorney with a history of plea bargaining assigned to defend Bergdahl and tell the prosecution to offer a very attractive plea so it nevers gets to a courtroom.

I think they made a movie based on this once......

#203 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 04:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

I think they made a movie based on this once......

#203 | POSTED BY EBERLY...yes, but the defense attorney didn't adhere to their plans.

Col. Nathan Jessup is mightily pissed off about it.

#204 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-04 04:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yeah when he leaves a letter stating he's leaving to start a new life it really sounds like he's coming back.

#205 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-04 04:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'm used to Republicans explaining why war decorations don't mean anything.

#187 | POSTED BY ZED

Are we talking about medals? Or just ribbons? Let's ask our Secretary of State. John Kerry says there is a substantive difference:

Contradicting his statements as a candidate for president, Sen. John Kerry claimed in a 1971 television interview that he threw away as many as nine of his combat medals to protest the war in Vietnam.

"I gave back, I can't remember, six, seven, eight, nine medals," Kerry said in an interview on a Washington, D.C., news program on WRC-TV called Viewpoints on Nov. 6, 1971, according to a tape obtained by ABCNEWS.

Throughout his presidential campaign, Kerry has denied that he threw away any of his medals during an anti-war protest in April 1971. "I threw my ribbons. I didn't have my medals. It is very simple."

abcnews.go.com

Medals go farther when you throw them.

#206 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-04 04:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

- sounds like

Is not a fact.

Why rwingers can't waitr for an investigation with him present before lynching him in public is.... OK, obviously it is ODS.

#207 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 04:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Repeatable.

#201 | POSTED BY CORKY

Can't flag yourself NW since M8 outed his spoof account?

#208 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-04 04:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

#207

what a putz. All of the rightwingers WILL wait for an investigation.

quit whining, baby.

#209 | Posted by eberly at 2014-06-04 04:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

So, what does the administration do if a Court Martial takes place?

I guessing it won't happen but not for any reason you might think. There is a tenet in UCMJ case law that precludes a trial when high level officials in the chain of command make public comments about guilt or innocence because those comments taint the lower level jury pool. Thus, a fair trial cannot be had.

Now, let me guess where this comment leads.

#210 | Posted by et_al at 2014-06-04 04:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

Are we talking about medals? Or just ribbons?

#206 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-0

They're the same thing, except that they're not. This is only confusing when you prefer to be confused and not burn a minute finding out.

#211 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 05:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Hating on Bowe Bergdahl

Embittered by double defeats in Iraq and Afghanistan, driven out of both countries with their tails between their legs, the War Party is looking for scapegoats, and has found one in the least likely place – the ranks of the US Army. That's right: the "support the troops" contingent is now intent on re-torturing Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, a 26-year-old Idaho native held captive by the Taliban for five horrific years.

A concerted campaign, stage-managed by "Republican strategists", is pitting some of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl's former comrades against the just-released prisoner-of-war. We don't yet know the circumstances of his capture, and so these calls for prosecution are premature, to say the least. Not that legal niceties like evidence matter to the baying wolves of the neocon media: they want vengeance for the war they lost and were widely blamed for. Having lost on the battlefield in Afghanistan, the War Party is seeking a victory on the home front.

The persecution of Bowe Bergdahl is just the first chapter in the neocons' ongoing revisionist history of the Afghan war. And we know the theme of this work of fiction from the very first act: it's a tired replay of the old "we-were-stabbed-in-the-back" myth promulgated by failed Napoleons in every country. In the American version, they said – and still say – the same thing about the Vietnam war – we were prevented from winning by squeamish liberals and anti-American war protesters, who secretly (and not so secretly) supported the Commie cause.

Antiwar

#212 | Posted by Derek_Wildstar at 2014-06-04 05:23 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

-The persecution of Bowe Bergdahl

NW post

#213 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-04 05:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

Gads to read your hyper posts you would think that we are back in the old west the the Republicans are looking for a good tree? We can wait for due process but there is NOT one single true republican that trust this administration not to intercede here. We hope to be pleasantly surprised.

#214 | Posted by paneocon at 2014-06-04 05:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

And we know the theme of this work of fiction from the very first act: it's a tired replay of the old "we-were-stabbed-in-the-back" myth promulgated by failed Napoleons in every country.

#212 | POSTED BY DEREK_WILDSTAR

Opening Scene:

www.youtube.com

#215 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-04 05:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

#215 | POSTED BY DIXVILLENOTCH

The best part of that video is comparing it to now.

www.blogcdn.com

#216 | Posted by paneocon at 2014-06-04 05:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

They're the same thing, except that they're not. This is only confusing when you prefer to be confused and not burn a minute finding out.

#211 | POSTED BY ZED

I'm not surprised you didn't read the thread and came away confused as to who drew distinctions between ribbons and medals.

Secretary of State John Kerry is the ribbon tosser.

#217 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-04 06:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'm used to Republicans explaining why war decorations don't mean anything.
#187 | POSTED BY ZED

Are we talking about medals? Or just ribbons?
#206 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-0

They're the same thing, except that they're not. This is only confusing when you prefer to be confused and not burn a minute finding out.

#211 | POSTED BY ZED

Here you go, Zeddie. FTW, I'll re-post John Kerry's words and the ABC news link from #206 for you.

"I threw my ribbons. I didn't have my medals. It is very simple."

abcnews.go.com

#206 | POSTED BY DIXVILLENOTCH

#218 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-04 07:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

- Ayers
- Wright
- Birth Certificate
- Birth Certificate (again)
- Fascist
- Communist
- Kenyan
- Nazi
- Benghazi

GOP wet dreams that help them sleep at night (wank/wink)..by all means..continue

#219 | Posted by drewinnj at 2014-06-04 07:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

what a putz. All of the rightwingers WILL wait for an investigation.

quit whining, baby.

#209 | Posted by eberly

Only because they HAVE to wait.

Else he would be strung up and dead already.

And just because they have to wait it won't stop them from slandering his name and swift boating him at every opportunity.

Disgusting slimy behavior.

Wake up and smell the hate.

#220 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-06-04 07:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

Desert at your own risk, right D-Boy?

#221 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-04 07:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I threw my ribbons. I didn't have my medals. It is very simple."

#206 | POSTED BY DIXVILLENOTCH

Well, I understand that statement. I don't understand your point.

#222 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-04 08:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'm used to Republicans explaining why war decorations don't mean anything.

#187 | POSTED BY ZED

Most of us are used to Democrats explaining why war decorations don't mean anything. John Kerry has been doing it since 1972.

#223 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-04 11:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

One must be gone 30 days--before returning or being captured by enemy forces--to meet the criterion of desertion. Bergdahl does not even match the prosecutorial definition of deserter.

#224 | Posted by kenx at 2014-06-04 11:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ayers
- Wright
- Birth Certificate
- Birth Certificate (again)
- Fascist
- Communist
- Kenyan
- Nazi
- Benghazi

GOP wet dreams that help them sleep at night (wank/wink)..by all means..continue

#219 | Posted by drewinnj at 20

GOOD...you're ready to get to the bottom of the IRS scandal where American citizens were targeted by the govt for their political ideas.

but you're a little behind....the DENY DENY DENY period of the liberal attack plan is about over...everyone else is in the 'what difference does it make..>DUDE>..." period....PLEASE KEEP UP !!!!

#225 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-06-05 12:06 AM | Reply | Flag:

One must be gone 30 days--before returning or being captured by enemy forces--to meet the criterion of desertion. Bergdahl does not even match the prosecutorial definition of deserter.

#224 | Posted by kenx at

what ????

your premise wouldn't have even applied to the guys who fled to canada by that definition.....so NONE of the men who went to Canada were deserters??

#226 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-06-05 12:08 AM | Reply | Flag:

explain that further, if you please...

#227 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2014-06-05 12:09 AM | Reply | Flag:

And just because they have to wait it won't stop them from slandering his name and swift boating him at every opportunity.
Disgusting slimy behavior.
Wake up and smell the hate.
#220 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY

The "slander" is coming from those who served with him.

According the those on the ground at the time, he deserted.

Obama and other leftists may regard desertion as noble, but the army and most of the rest of America regard it as a repugnant criminal act.

The administration made a conscious choice amid near-universal opposition (to the extent that they even sought opinions outside their tight-knit circle) to hitch their cart to this guy. They made a conscious decision to take, by all accounts, a dishonorable man and characterize him as honorable.

Now they are suffering push-back and are so insular and so arrogant that they can't understand why. This will only further cement Obama's self-perception of victimhood.

When it comes to Bergdahl, the fact is it would appear that the administration's choice to lionize his service has motivated soldiers, who apparently signed non-disclosure agreements, to speak out. Desertion is a cardinal sin to soldiers.

#228 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 09:46 AM | Reply | Flag:

We don't need an investigation because we have JeffJ. He knows what is true and what is not and those who have seen the actual report from the investigation done in 2010 should defer to his superior knowldedge of the subject.

#229 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-05 09:56 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

motivated soldiers, who apparently signed non-disclosure agreements, to speak out.

#228 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014

That's right. They did sign non-disclosure statements. Therefore they are subject to court-martial, just as surely as Bergdhal might be.

I'm sorry. There's no reason to accept such stories automatically. The assertion is intuitively suspect.

There's increasing evidence that a right-wing propaganda machine went into over-drive with Bergdahl. These people have no problem telling lies.

Therefore, every little tidbit is going to have to examined throughly and in the full light of day. Sorry if this inconveniences anyone's agenda.

#230 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 10:08 AM | Reply | Flag:

They made a conscious decision to take, by all accounts, a dishonorable man and characterize him as honorable.

#228 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 09:46 A

That's right, JEFF. Don't wait for the investigation or the court-martial, if there is one.

We're all news wonks here, so we know what you're doing. Maybe time to be a little ashamed of yourself.

#231 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 10:11 AM | Reply | Flag:

There's increasing evidence that a right-wing propaganda machine went into over-drive with Bergdahl. These people have no problem telling lies.

Unprepared for their own party's outrage over the prisoner swap that led to the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, ...well-known Republicans did what they could to expunge their initial celebrations of the soldier's rescue. It didn't work, as several outlets captured the public praise offered on Twitter and elsewhere by two Republican House members and a GOP U.S. Senate hopeful.

Not long after the White House announced the prisoner exchange on Saturday afternoon, Joni Ernst, tweeting days before she easily claimed the Republican nomination in Iowa's Senate race, noted the news and offered her "[t]houghts & prayers" to Bergdahl's family. According to Politwoops, the tweet was deleted 25 minutes later.

The Upshot's Derek Willis noticed that Rep. Lee Terry (R-NE) put out a statement and Facebook post on Saturday about Bergdahl's release before scrubbing them both.

"A grateful nation welcomes the news of the return of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl," Terry said in the statement. "I have the pleasure of regularly speaking with our nation's active duty military and veterans and I know that there is nothing more solemn than the pledge to never leave one of their own behind on the field of battle." Terry called Bergdahl a "national hero."

A tweet from Terry's account remains on his feed, but it contains a link that leads to a page where his now-deleted statement used to exist. talkingpointsmemo.com

#232 | Posted by tonyroma at 2014-06-05 10:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

"That's right, JEFF. Don't wait for the investigation or the court-martial, if there is one."

Yet no one wants an investigation of Benghazi.. let's just close that one and call anyone who wants to look into it a loon. Nicely played.

#233 | Posted by sames1 at 2014-06-05 10:17 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Yet no one wants an investigation of Benghazi.."

Er....I believe the 10th investigation of Benghazi is still ongoing right now. How many more do we need? 5? 10? 100? 1000?

#234 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-05 10:23 AM | Reply | Flag:

Tony excluding the congress members who have reversed their position. Do you think the soldiers that served with him are lying? At this point not one soldiers has defended Bergdahl. I saw the interview with the guy that has helped these soldiers get their message about Bergdahl out and he claims those soldiers reached out to a lot of high profile people to let Americans this guy shouldn't be treated as a hero.

#235 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 10:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

#234 | POSTED BY DANNI

"...what difference does it make!?"

#237 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-05 10:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

They made a conscious decision to take, by all accounts, a dishonorable man and characterize him as honorable.
#228 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 09:46 A

That's right, JEFF. Don't wait for the investigation or the court-martial, if there is one.
We're all news wonks here, so we know what you're doing. Maybe time to be a little ashamed of yourself.

#231 | POSTED BY ZED

I happen to believe these soldiers, Zed. To the best of my knowledge, none of those who served with him are offering differing accounts. If somebody does surface, then my opinion might change.

Regardless of what I believe, I expect the process to be followed.

It starts with a formal investigation. If said investigation produces evidence of wrong-doing, the I expect a court-martial. If the investigation doesn't produce evidence of wrong-doing, then I expect those who are making these allegations to be looked at.

If the Court Martial finds him guilty of wrong-doing then I expect a sentence commensurate with the crime. If the Court Martial finds him innocent, then so be it.

#238 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 11:03 AM | Reply | Flag:

CNN's most recent poll provided a clear indicator of this dynamic in the wake of two major controversies involving military issues. The results showed that Obama did not gain a majority of support for any of twelve issues surveyed from the respondents. In fact, in ten of the twelve issues, majorities disapproved of the President's performance, and only on one – the environment, usually an overwhelming Democratic strength – did his approval exceed his disapproval, and only barely at 49/45. On the economy and health care, which the poll identified as the top two priorities of its respondents, Obama's approval ratings sank to 38/61 and 36/63, respectively."

That speaks truth to the power of the GOP propaganda machine to brainwash the masses.

#239 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 11:05 AM | Reply | Flag:

That's right, JEFF. Don't wait for the investigation or the court-martial, if there is one.

#231 | Posted by Zed

Zed focuses on the minor and ignores the major. Those 5 guys released going to return to Gitmo on their own volition if this plays out that Bowe took off?

#240 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-05 11:11 AM | Reply | Flag:

Yet no one wants an investigation of Benghazi..

#233 | Posted by sames1 at 2014-06-05 10:17 AM | Reply

How many invesitgations have there been of Benghazi, SAMES? Can you count?

#241 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 11:12 AM | Reply | Flag:

"That speaks truth to the power of the GOP propaganda machine to brainwash the masses."

Actually, it speaks to the power of the media and the administration's propaganda experts to KEEP those 30% approval people brainwashed.

"...Obama's approval ratings sank to 38/61 and 36/63, respectively."

#242 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-05 11:14 AM | Reply | Flag:

Those 5 guys released going to return to Gitmo on their own volition if this plays out that Bowe took off?

#240 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-05 11:11 AM | Reply |

We return our servicemen regardless of character. I see you guys have lost your shame over applying a moral test to who we get back. It took you.....A little more than twenty-four hours since you last said you weren't doing it.

#243 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 11:14 AM | Reply | Flag:

"The polling numbers suggest that Americans have finally reached a point where the incompetence and dishonesty are just too obvious to ignore any longer."

But not to SOME retards...LOLOL.

#244 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-05 11:15 AM | Reply | Flag:

I happen to believe these soldiers, Zed.

#238 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 11:03

I happen to wonder if any of these soldiers even exist, JEFF. Give me one name, just one, and I'll look into it.

By the way, I'm still waiting for you to tell me where you read Bergdhal's service record. I want my turn.

#245 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 11:16 AM | Reply | Flag:

"I see you guys have lost your shame over applying a moral test to who we get back."

OK, Zed...you passed the "moral test," but you FAILED the "brain test" miserably.

#246 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-05 11:17 AM | Reply | Flag:

Zed, read something other than this thread. There are tons of stories from sources you usually find acceptable with platoon mates of this guy.

#247 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-05 11:18 AM | Reply | Flag:

We return our servicemen regardless of character.

Not according to this guy:

I cannot begin to communicate how deeply the military feels about deserters. And one last point: please, I'm sick of hearing people even on FOX, instant experts who never served in the military saying, 'Well we always went after our deserters and our troops and brought them home, even if they're deserters.' Megyn, throughout much of our history we did go after deserters, and when we got them we shot them or hanged them or if we were in a good mood we would brand them with a 'D' on their cheeks or forehead. When we became enlightened in the 20th century, we still shot some but we always sent them to prison for hard labor. This is not a minor offense. Desertion is very, very grave and team Obama just doesn't get it.

#248 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 11:20 AM | Reply | Flag:

I happen to wonder if any of these soldiers even exist, JEFF. Give me one name, just one, and I'll look into it.

#245 | Posted by Zed

Wow. That speaks volumes.

#249 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-05 11:20 AM | Reply | Flag:

happen to wonder if any of these soldiers even exist, JEFF. Give me one name, just one, and I'll look into it.

News for soldiers accuse bergdahl of deserting

Bergdahl Accused by at Least a Dozen Soldiers and ...
National Review Online (blog) ‎- 6 hours ago
Several of Bergdahl's former platoon members accuse him of deserting his unit in 2009 and emphasize that six other soldiers died during the ...
More news for soldiers accuse bergdahl of deserting
Fellow soldiers call Bowe Bergdahl a deserter, not a hero ...
www.cnn.com/2014/06/01/us/
bergdahl-deserter-or-hero/CNN
2 days ago - "Bowe Bergdahl deserted during a time of war, and his fellow Americans ... His family and the Obama administration deny accusations he was ...
''Bowe Bergdahl is NOT a hero!'' American soldiers accuse ...
www.mirror.co.uk/.../bowe-
bergdahl-not-hero-america...
The Daily Mirror
3 days ago - Soldiers who served alongside freed US private Bowe Bergdahl have called for him to be court martialed for "deserting his post" - while the ...
Fellow Soldiers Blast Bergdahl Trade, Accuse Him of ...
townhall.com/.../fellow-
soldiers-blast-bergdahl-trade-
n184...
Townhall.com


Here's a name for you to look into, Zed:

Josh Cornelison

#250 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 11:25 AM | Reply | Flag:

It took you.....A little more than twenty-four hours since you last said you weren't doing it.

#243 | Posted by Zed

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but so is Chris Matthews.

#251 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-05 11:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

"I was pissed off then, and I am even more so now with everything going on," said former Sgt. Matt Vierkant, a member of Bergdahl's platoon when he went missing on June 30, 2009. "Bowe Bergdahl deserted during a time of war, and his fellow Americans lost their lives searching for him."

"Any of us would have died for him while he was with us, and then for him to just leave us like that, it was a very big betrayal," said former U.S. Army Sgt. Josh Korder, who has the name of three soldiers who died while searching for Bergdahl tatooed on his back."

Here are two Zed. You can do the rest of the work yourself.

#252 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 11:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

"I happen to wonder if any of these soldiers even exist, JEFF. Give me one name, just one, and I'll look into it."

Gerald Sutton, Cody Full, Nathan Bradley Bethea, 2nd Lt. Darryn Andrews...Here ya' go, Zed, just a few for you to spend the rest of the day trying to discredit. Have fun "looking into it" it, OK?

What a dork...LOLOL.

#253 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-05 11:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

Look Zed. There are three names provided to you. Now get to work.

#254 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 11:28 AM | Reply | Flag:

"I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but so is Chris Matthews."

Jon Stewart too...BUT Baghdad Zed, danni Rice and the others are still hangin' tight. They'll ride the ship down with the messiah!

"Jon Stewart opened Tuesday night with "a magnificent, wonderful story" about an American POW returning safely home… except, well, it turns out we all may have rode the "patriot train to ---- Yeah! junction" just a wee bit too soon…
So rather than being "a magnificent, wonderful story" this turned out to be… "an absolutely terrible, disastrous catastrophe that is the single worst thing we as a country have ever done, and yes, that includes when we gave syphilis to prisoners."

www.mediaite.com

#255 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-05 11:34 AM | Reply | Flag:

OK.

So here is the partial list so far:

Josh Cornelison
Matt Vierkant
Josh Korder
Gerald Sutton
Cody Full
Nathan Bradley Bethea
Darryn Andrews

.Here ya' go, Zed, just a few for you to spend the rest of the day trying to discredit. Have fun "looking into it" it, OK?

That really made me laugh.

#256 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 11:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

Wow. That speaks volumes.

#249 | Posted by wisgod at

Maybe it should----

I find a 2nd Lieutenant Darryn Andrews. He was killed in action on 09/04/2009.

Is he the same one you're talking about? Because if he is, I've got a few more questions.

#257 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 11:45 AM | Reply | Flag:

2nd Lieutenant Darryn Andrews. He was killed in action on 09/04/2009.
#257 | POSTED BY ZED

What's your issue ZED dead Democrats have been voting and collecting benefits for decades?

#258 | Posted by paneocon at 2014-06-05 11:49 AM | Reply | Flag:

I'm going to need a specific citation that shows Lt. Andrews, and it does seem to be your Lt. Andrews, said anything about Sergeant Bergdhal, and what he said, prior to his (Andrews) death, three months after Bergdhal was captured.

#259 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 11:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

What's your issue ZED

#258 | Posted by paneocon at

You know where I'm going with this. If the facts are on your side the facts are on your side. But please forgive me if I make you prove that a bit more than you have been.

Refer to my post #259.

#260 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 11:52 AM | Reply | Flag:

"I happen to wonder if any of these soldiers even exist, JEFF. Give me one name, just one, and I'll look into it."-Zed

First you want some names. Then you want someone to do the research for you. What a liar.

#261 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 11:54 AM | Reply | Flag:

Funny thing is that Zed is more coherent than KKKudzu. Quite the low-bar contest.

#262 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-05 11:58 AM | Reply | Flag:

There's increasing evidence that a right-wing propaganda machine went into over-drive with Bergdahl. These people have no problem telling lies.

talkingpointsmemo.com

#232 | POSTED BY TONYROMA

Is that the newest talkingpoinsmemo.com you're citing?

I'm asking because it sounds a lot like the old talking points.

#263 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-05 12:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

Maybe we can hold a seance and get Darryn Andrews' take.

Cross him off, Zed. That still leaves a partial list of 5 other names.

You asked for just one name and were given six, which you've now reduced to 5.

#264 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 12:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I find a 2nd Lieutenant Darryn Andrews. He was killed in action on 09/04/2009."

Good, Zedsie, good! Yeah, his widow was interviewed on TV recently. Did you discover the comments he made before he was killed searching for the maggot?

Now that you've done an admirable job of research with one guy, go on to some of the others. I'm proud of ya' so far, buddy.

(See how much fun this is, Pan and Jeff.)

#265 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-05 12:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

here's increasing evidence that a right-wing propaganda machine went into over-drive with Bergdahl.

It's funny to me that soldiers proclaiming he deserted somehow equates to a 'right-wing propaganda machine'.

#266 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 12:08 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

See how much fun this is, Pan and Jeff

Yep. It's a blast!

#267 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 12:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Maybe we can hold a seance and get Darryn Andrews' take."

Hey, give ol' Zedsie some credit. At least he admitted Anderson existed and was a real person. That's a ---- of an accomplishment for Zedsie.

#268 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-05 12:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

"It's funny to me that soldiers proclaiming he deserted somehow equates to a 'right-wing propaganda machine'."

Tony's one o' them 30 percenters of today and has been in love with Obummus since the primaries in 2008. Ain't NUTHIN' gonna change that.

#269 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-05 12:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

I think what is actually going on is that Obama is bringing all but 9800 troops out of Afghanistan by the end of the year, he's ending the second of Bush's two wars and they are trying to cloud that with issues like Bergdahl's release by the Taliban. They know that when the dust clears Obama will be the President that actually did what he said he was going to do...end Bush's stupid wars that cost the lives of thousands of Americans. Expect more "scandals" to distract Americans away from the big events like the ending of a war.

#270 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-05 12:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I think what is actually going on..."

You "think?" Really!? Now THAT would be a remarkable event. Certainly more deserving of celebration than Bergdahl's return.

#271 | Posted by jestgettinalong at 2014-06-05 12:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

I think..."

#270 | Posted by danni at 2014-06-05 12:22 PM | Reply | Flag

I thought I smelled wires burning.

#272 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 12:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

Gad Danni I was I had a time machine to see how you cheered when President Nixon ended Kennedy's & Johnson's stupid war. And again speaking of Bush's stupid wars how many stupid Democrats voted for them?

#273 | Posted by tontonmacoute at 2014-06-05 12:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

Then you want someone to do the research for you. What a liar.

#261 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 11

You well may be. Give me that quote by the then still-living Lt. Anderson regarding Sgt. Bergdhal, or shut up about it all.

Some of you are making quips about séances. Well, the next time you channel Lt. Anderson, invite me.

#274 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 12:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

Cross him off, Zed. That still leaves a partial list of 5 other names.

#264 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 12:0

Cross him off? Why was he on the list in the first place?

Old ZED still works. I'm going to follow up on your other five names, as soon as I get a break.

The real question is this: Did you follow up on the five names?

#275 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 12:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's funny to me that soldiers proclaiming he deserted somehow equates to a 'right-wing propaganda machine'.

#266 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-

We crossed one of your soldiers off the list, didn't we? How did he get on that list? Did you do it?

#276 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 12:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

Don't cross Andrews off at all Zed, you self-absorbed prock. All you had to do was google his name to find this from his father:

Andrews said his son had told them about Bergdahl deserting the unit in the months before his death.

Andrews said the government never mentioned the search for Bergdahl after their son's death, only telling them at the time that Lt. Andrews died while hunting a Taliban commander. He said he's been told that soldiers had to sign non-disclosure agreements, promising they would not discuss the search for Bergdahl.

#277 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-05 12:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

#274 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 12:43 PM | Reply | Flag

I didn't post a quote from Anderson. I posted quotes from soldiers that are currently alive.

#278 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 12:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

Zed, you are not very good at that research you said you would do.

On my computer I highlight "Darryn Andrews" with the mouse and right-click. That brings up a menu that includes "Search on Google for Darryn Andrews." I've re-written his name here a couple times so you can try it, too.

Darryn Andrews

#279 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-05 12:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

I didn't post a quote from Anderson.

#278 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 12:51 PM |

I asked, and am asking, for any relevant quotes from Anderson. That this man was long dead is a fact you fellows didn't know, or wished to omit.

#280 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 12:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

Darryn Andrews

#279 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

Thanks. I found him the firs time. Do you have any quotes regarding Bergdhal from the late Lt. Anderson?

#281 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 12:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

Andrews said his son had told them about Bergdahl deserting the unit in the months before his death.

#277 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014

Oh, I see. You've got the bereaved father standing in for the dead son. Pretty impressive.

#282 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 12:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'll take Andrew's dad over Bergdahl's dad.

#283 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-05 12:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

Thanks. I found him the firs time. Do you have any quotes regarding Bergdhal from the late Lt. Anderson?

#281 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 12:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

Again. I didn't post anything from Anderson. I quoted people who were just on tv the last couple of days. Why are you fixated on one soldier that is deceased?

#284 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 01:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's funny to me that soldiers proclaiming he deserted somehow equates to a 'right-wing propaganda machine'.

#266 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

We've seen Swiftboaters before. This is just the desert version.

#285 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I think what is actually going on is that Obama is bringing all but 9800 troops out of Afghanistan by the end of the year"

After having promised to bring them all home this year.

"They know that when the dust clears Obama will be the President that actually did what he said he was going to do..."

LOL.

#286 | Posted by Sully at 2014-06-05 01:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

We've seen Swiftboaters before. This is just the desert version.
#285 | POSTED BY CORKY

Take it up with those who served with him. They are the ones making most of the noise.

#287 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 01:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

We've seen Swiftboaters before. This is just the desert version.

#285 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

You're joining Zed's game of "attack the guys who did their jobs in defense of a deserter"?

Of course you are.

#288 | Posted by Sully at 2014-06-05 01:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

#288

I'm not joining those like yourself who call someone a deserter, which is a legal term in the military, for which this person does not meet the requirements.

You and your rwing buddies may want to convict a 5 year American POW in the court of public opinion before he has a chance to defend himself in an investigation, but I am not.

#289 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

One supposes you must think that the folks who Swiftboated John Ferry were just "doing their jobs", too.

#290 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

John Kerry

#291 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

Are the ones that talked to The Rolling Stone years before his release swift boaters too? This guy was a scumbag, and everyone other than the diehard obamabots knows it. Well, you clowns know it too, but you're willing to play the fool for your hero...as if you're protecting him some how. It really is strange.

#292 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-06-05 01:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

-This guy was a scumbag

Says more about the poster than about the guy.

#293 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

John Ferry

#290 | POSTED BY CORKY

*Freudian slurp*

#294 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-05 01:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

may want to convict a 5 year American POW in the court of public opinion before he has a chance to defend himself in an investigation,

#289 | POSTED BY CORKY

I mostly just didn't want to trade the starting five on Gitmo All-Star basketball team to get him.

#295 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-05 01:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

You and your rwing buddies may want to convict a 5 year American POW in the court of public opinion before he has a chance to defend himself in an investigation, but I am not.

#289 | POSTED BY CORKY

All of the information currently available points to AWOL, at best, if not desertion.

If an investigation bears this out and he's successfully charged for being AWOL or desertion in a court martial, will it be a product of partisan swift-boating?

#296 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 01:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

They've got the talking points sent out from the WH. This morning reporters were saying that WH staff was surprised that Bergdahl was getting the "swiftboat" treatment. Wait until they start attacking these soldiers that actually served with honor and distinction.

#297 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 01:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

They've got the talking points sent out from the WH. This morning reporters were saying that WH staff was surprised that Bergdahl was getting the "swiftboat" treatment. Wait until they start attacking these soldiers that actually served with honor and distinction.

#297 | POSTED BY DALTON

I'd like to think they aren't stupid enough to go that route.

But this administration is so thin-skinned and tone-deaf I wouldn't put it past them.

#298 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 01:32 PM | Reply | Flag:

There are to many thread on this topic to move around to, so let's use the largest one to get rid of some instant myths created by politically-motivated groups.


Behind P.O.W.'s Release: Urgency and Opportunity
Concern for Health of Bowe Bergdahl Drove Prisoner Exchange

www.nytimes.com

His medical condition was a real and motivating factor.

Can Bowe Bergdahl Be Tied to 6 Lost Lives? Facts Are Murky

Two soldiers died during the most intense period of the search after Sergeant Bergdahl's June 30 disappearance. Both were inside an outpost that came under attack, not out patrolling and running checkpoints looking for him. The other six soldiers died in late August and early September.

www.nytimes.com

The soldiers who died later were patrolling hotspots they would have patrolled anyway.

Bowe Bergdahl Is the Right's New Benghazi

Buckle up: The right is going to try to turn the Taliban prisoner swap for ‘deserter' Bowe Bergdahl into a Willie Horton moment for the president -- and they'll ride it to January 2017.

www.thedailybeast.com

The political motivation on the Right to Swiftboat this soldier is transparent.

#299 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yes, corky, he is a scumbag. The fact you're pretending otherwise is pathetically transparent.

The only way you'd admit he was a scumbag is if Obama said he was a scumbag. There isn't one poster here that isn't aware of it.

#300 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-06-05 01:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

#300

There is at least one who substitutes assigning motivation for a solid argument... as he doesn't have one.

#301 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I'm not joining those like yourself who call someone a deserter, which is a legal term in the military, for which this person does not meet the requirements."

The legal distinction is only in play because he found the Taliban (or they found him) very quickly. His intent was to be a deserter.

"You and your rwing buddies may want to convict a 5 year American POW in the court of public opinion before he has a chance to defend himself in an investigation, but I am not."

Has nothing to do with opinion. The guys who served with him says he walked off. They're the only credible source of information available. Not only that, but his own communications with his family strongly supports the stories coming from his comrades. There is zero real evidence that anything else happened.

There is zero chance of there ever being a real investigation on this either so there is no sense in waiting to form an opinion.

#302 | Posted by Sully at 2014-06-05 01:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

-If an investigation bears this out

I can wait, why can't you?

#303 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

The political motivation on the Right to Swiftboat this soldier is transparent.

#299 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

There is at least one who substitutes assigning motivation for a solid argument... as he doesn't have one.

#301 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

Corky finally says something that passes the sniff test!

LOL

#304 | Posted by Sully at 2014-06-05 01:44 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

-His intent was to be a deserter.

Yet another psychic Truth Master who don' neeed no steeenkin' investigation.

-There is zero chance of there ever being a real investigation on this either so there is no sense in waiting to form an opinion.

How convenient for you. NOw you can lynch him publicall as much as you want.

The facts presented in the articles linked in #299 notwithstanding, of course.

#305 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obama didn't back down today so is it any surpise what Corky's position is?

#306 | Posted by wisgod at 2014-06-05 01:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

-LOL

The article backs up the claim. But your attempt at Deflection is noted.

#307 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

#306

Another with no argument that can only rely on impugning motivation.

Fact is, I have no idea what the WH said today.

#308 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:47 PM | Reply | Flag:

His literal platoon mates are telling us what happened. The guys that were there. But old cork is not budging until Obama gives the word...because to admit the obvious about bergdal could some how make Obama look bad, and corky can't have none of that. No way, not his team. Gobama!

#309 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-06-05 01:50 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

-His literal platoon mates

Is that as opposed to his virtual ones?

They should stfu and wait for the promised DOD investigation and testify in court rather than Swiftboating this soldier as their GOP consultant instructs.

#310 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:52 PM | Reply | Flag:

Funny how no one wants to argue the myths demolished in the article in #299.... but I guess they already made up their minds.... including those myths.

#311 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

The facts presented in the articles linked in #299 notwithstanding, of course.

#305 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yet another example of this genius posting a link that doesn't support the point he claims it supports. There is nothing in that article that would disprove anything his former peers are saying now.

#312 | Posted by Sully at 2014-06-05 01:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

#312

Reading comprehension sucks.

Tell us which of the three articles you don't understand and we'll find a 5 year old to 'splain it to you.

#313 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Dereliction of duty is a specific offense under United States Code Title 10,892. Article 92 and applies to all branches of the US military. A service member who is derelict has willfully refused to perform his duties (or follow a given order) or has incapacitated himself in such a way that he cannot perform his duties. Such incapacitation includes the person falling asleep while on duty requiring wakefulness, his getting drunk or otherwise intoxicated and consequently being unable to perform his duties, shooting himself and thus being unable to perform any duty, or his vacating his post contrary to regulations."

This is from Wiki and so if nothing else we know at best he didn't serve with honor and distinction. Notice leaving your post is a dereliction of duty.

#314 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 02:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

You're joining Zed's game of "attack the guys who did their jobs in defense of a deserter"?

#288 | Posted by Sully at 2014

I just pointed out that one of the guys has been dead these last five years.

I'm not sure why telling the truth is an attack.

As for the remainder.....Well, I've read what they said about Bergdhal. Interestingly, they say different things, and not all of them seem angry.

#315 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 02:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

See Corky just wanted President I di-in't know to get his victory lap and everybody just stfu.

#316 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 02:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

Bowe Bergdahl swap: Did President Obama break the law? (+video)

Republican critics say President Obama failed to give Congress adequate notice about the Bowe Bergdahl prisoner swap.

The argument doesn't end there, however. What if the law in question is itself unconstitutional? After all, the president of the United States is also the nation's commander in chief under the Constitution (Article II, Section 2, Clause I). That invests him with enormous military powers, particularly in regards to tactical and strategic decisions. What if Congress passed a law requiring a 30-day notice before a president could order troops to patrol? That would pretty clearly be unconstitutional. Some analysts argue that a decision to repatriate a captured soldier isn't much different.

"The President pretty clearly exercised his constitutional powers under Article II to disregard the statute," writes Harvard Law School professor Jack Goldsmith at the "Lawfare" national security legal blog.

www.csmonitor.com

The legal aspect is not cut and dried, so yet another myth exposed.

#317 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

If Obama doesn't try to score his political victory lap on this guys back none of these soldiers would have come out.

#318 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 02:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

Just to mention: None of the servicemen quoted have any special information on what Bergdhal actually did or did not do, much less his motivations. They have they're opinions, and they have their feelings, which they are of course entitled to.

#319 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 02:06 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Tell us which of the three articles you don't understand and we'll find a 5 year old to 'splain it to you.

#313 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 01:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

You're the one making untrue claims about content. As usual.

#320 | Posted by Sully at 2014-06-05 02:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

If Obama doesn't try to score his political victory lap on this guys back none of these soldiers would have come out.

#318 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 02:06

Your GOP operatives would have found them.

#321 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 02:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

-everybody just stfu.

Until they can testify to an investigation, they, the soldiers not "everybody", should stop the public lynching coordinated by their Republican consultants.

#322 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

#320

You are the one claiming something is untrue without specifying what that is.

Go ahead, tell us....

#323 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

The legal aspect is not cut and dried,

He violated the law. That is not in dispute.

The question then becomes, does this law place on unconstitutional constraint on the CiC?

I don't think it does, but the position that it does is plausible.

#324 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 02:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

You are the one claiming something is untrue without specifying what that is.

Go ahead, tell us....

#323 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

Your general claim that the link "demolishes" what people are saying in this thread is untrue.

#325 | Posted by Sully at 2014-06-05 02:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

Your GOP operatives would have found them.

#321 | Posted by Zed at 2014-06-05 02:07 PM | Reply | Flag

How do you know? You guys were the ones talking about facts and now you're projecting. Besides it doesn't matter at this point. W/out a doubt he is guilty of dereliction of duty so that proves that Obama and Rice lied when they claimed he served with honor and distinction.

#326 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 02:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'd have a much easier time with the constitutional argument if Obama wasn't a serial violator of the Constitution.

#327 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 02:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

#325

rofl!

You could have just said, "Well, I have nothing."

#328 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

Until they can testify to an investigation, they, the soldiers not "everybody", should stop the public lynching coordinated by their Republican consultants.

#322 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:08 PM | Reply | Flag

Why? Are they less of a American citizen than you are? They have every right to speak out if they choose. You guys only want the people that are the Obama political victory lap to speak and everyone else can stfu right?

#329 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 02:16 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Just to mention: None of the servicemen quoted have any special information on what Bergdhal actually did or did not do"-Zed

Except they know that he left his post. Which is a dereliction of duty.

#330 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 02:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

-They have every right to speak out if they choose.

They have the right. If they are ever called on to testify under oath about what they said in the press to help out their GOP media firm, they might reconsider their responsibilities.

#331 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

- a dereliction of duty.

Ah, now there's a hanging offense, eh?

#332 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

Except they know that he left his post. Which is a dereliction of duty.
#330 | POSTED BY DALTON

Dereliction of duty is wide ranging and vague. It's not automatic that he's considered dishonorable simply because he left his post. If there's more to it (such as evidence of outright desertion, which I believe there is), then that's a separate matter entirely.

#333 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-05 02:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

*Well, not entirely. I hope you get my drift.

#334 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-05 02:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

You could have just said, "Well, I have nothing."

#328 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

I did say that you have nothing. Want me to say it again: You're a transparent shill with no credibility and you have nothing.

The only people with any credibility are saying Bergdahl abandoned his post.

#335 | Posted by Sully at 2014-06-05 02:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

Obviously just a lynching offense.

Now here is a rational, reasonable post....

The involvement of GOP operatives means there is political advantage to be gained in smearing an American POW.

If there wasn't, the national conversation would be far more sympathetic to Bergdahl, even though he was partially to blame for his abduction by the Taliban.

#33 | POSTED BY RCADE

#336 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ah, now there's a hanging offense, eh?

#332 | Posted by Corky

More to the point, is he worth the top 5 Taliban detainees? How much more would you have thrown in? A detainee to be named later? A case of balls?

#337 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-05 02:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

Scratch those balls. I forgot you don't have any to trade.

#338 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-05 02:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'd trade your case of no-balls for Bergdahl, no problem.

#339 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-05 02:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

-The only people with any credibility are saying Bergdahl abandoned his post.

Wow, light-weight aluminum goalposts. What WILL they think of next?

OF course, that was not in contention in any of the articles I posted... about which you said...

Yet another example of this genius posting a link that doesn't support the point he claims it supports. There is nothing in that article that would disprove anything his former peers are saying now.
#312 | POSTED BY SULLY

You have not even tried to support the claim that I posted, " a link that doesn't support the point he claims it supports".

When called on it, you demurred, rather sweetly, to claiming that, "Your general claim that the link "demolishes" what people are saying in this thread is untrue.".

Which is waving a white flag of surrender.

#340 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

More to the point, is he worth the top 5 Taliban detainees?
#337 | POSTED BY DIXVILLENOTCH

Five detainees that were going to be released by year's end anyways? Abso-fnckin'-lutely. They were not going to be charged with any crime. We are a nation of laws, are we not? Charge them or release them. They had been held for 12 years without charge. Gitmo closing. Can't hold all them for forever. Besides, if they are Taliban, they can't be considered terrorists, as Taliban is not terrorist organization. Not terrorists, no crimes committed, why are they being held?

#341 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-05 02:29 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

"The involvement of GOP operatives means there is political advantage to be gained in smearing an American POW."

Because the Obama admin already lied about him. There would be no political advantage to be gained by proving Obama's people lie if they hadn't lied.

"The GOP is wrong to want to prove the opponents are shameless liars" is not exactly the great point you think it is.

#342 | Posted by Sully at 2014-06-05 02:29 PM | Reply | Flag:

Five detainees that were going to be released by year's end anyways?

I still haven't seen a source on that. That's a bigger story than Bergdahl to me.

#343 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-05 02:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

- the Obama admin already lied about him.

What lie is that, specifically?

#344 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

#340 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

YOU claimed that your link demolishes what people critical of Bergdahl are saying. It does no such thing.

YOU made a general claim. I can only refute YOUR general claim.

Stop being such a blatant, idiotic hypocrite. I can't tell you what you were specifically referring to. You made a blanket statement that isn't true. So I can only tell you that your blanket statement is untrue.

Having to explain this to you makes me sad.

#345 | Posted by Sully at 2014-06-05 02:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

The GOP will politicize this to whatever extent they think it will benefit them.

The Obama administration put the opportunity for them to do so on a silver platter.

#346 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 02:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

What lie is that, specifically?

#344 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

That he served with distinction. That's a lie.

#347 | Posted by Sully at 2014-06-05 02:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

-It does no such thing.

It? What IT? There are 3 article linked on different topics ans when I asked which one you were referring to, you made some absurd general claim.

You have yet to specify which article does not demonstrate an alternative to the current myth being propagated by Republicans.

-YOU made a general claim. I can only refute YOUR general claim.

YOU lie. I made specific mention of each myth under each article link..

You are just too lazy a thinker to read and respond.

-sad

Ahhhhhh..... turn that frown upside down lil' munchkin!

#348 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:39 PM | Reply | Flag:

-The Obama administration put the opportunity for them to do so on a silver platter.

#346 | POSTED BY JEFF

Yes, the GOP's Swiftboating of this POW is Obama's Fault... for celebrating the release of the last American POW of these wars, one s'poses.

#349 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

That he served with distinction. That's a lie.
#347 | POSTED BY SULLY

That's an opinion of yours, not a fact.

If the only thing he ever did wrong was leave his post for 30 minutes until he was captured, he could still be said to have served with distinction for his 5 years as a POW, including his escape attempt and forcible capture.

If this is what your so outraged about, you should get a new job on Fox and Friends.

#350 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:43 PM | Reply | Flag:

You have yet to specify which article does not demonstrate an alternative to the current myth being propagated by Republicans.

What 'myth' are you referring to?

#351 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 02:45 PM | Reply | Flag:

Leaving your post for even 30 minutes is a dereliction of duty. So that alone proves he didn't serve with honor and distinction.

#352 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 02:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

#351

Read #299.

#353 | Posted by Corky at 2014-06-05 02:49 PM | Reply | Flag:

That's a bigger story than Bergdahl to me.
#343 | POSTED BY DIXVILLENOTCH

What, shutting down Gitmo? Yeah, it is big news.

(c) The individuals currently detained at Guantánamo have the constitutional privilege of the writ of habeas corpus. Most of those individuals have filed petitions for a writ of habeas corpus in Federal court challenging the lawfulness of their detention.

(d) It is in the interests of the United States that the executive branch undertake a prompt and thorough review of the factual and legal bases for the continued detention of all individuals currently held at Guantánamo, and of whether their continued detention is in the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and in the interests of justice. The unusual circumstances associated with detentions at Guantánamo require a comprehensive interagency review.

(e) New diplomatic efforts may result in an appropriate disposition of a substantial number of individuals currently detained at Guantánamo.

(f) Some individuals currently detained at Guantánamo may have committed offenses for which they should be prosecuted. It is in the interests of the United States to review whether and how any such individuals can and should be prosecuted.
www.whitehouse.gov

Now consider this:

Obama's comments Tuesday were in line with those of some legal scholars, who've argued that the legal basis for holding the men at Guantanamo will erode or disappear after the U.S. is no longer involved in active combat in Afghanistan -- something the president has pledged to bring to an end this year.

www.politico.com

It's clear they were not going to be able to charge the five Taliban in question at Gitmo. B. Hussein is ending the "war", which undermines his ability to hold enemy combatants indefinitely. He's also seeking to finally close Gitmo. These five detainees were going to be released anyways. We used them as leverage to snatch back a criminal deserter without giving up any money, which is what the Taliban were originally demanding (millions!). It was a win, but everyone else wants to make this political. Calling these five detainees "the most dangerous terrorists on the planet." Well they are not terrorists. If they were, they would have been charged as such. Don't have any evidence against them with the war drawing to a close, what did you expect us to do with them?

Again, we are a nation of laws, are we not?

#354 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-05 02:49 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

The Obama administration put the opportunity for them to do so on a silver platter.
#346 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Is it his fault that the nation is unable to acknowledge the inevitability of the situation? The "war" is drawing to a close. Gitmo will be closed within the year(?). These five detainees could not be charged with any crime. What was Obama supposed to do with them? It's not Obama's fault that the nation is incapable of adding two and two. We recovered a criminal (deserter) in exchange for five guys (non-terrorists) that were going to be released within the year anyways. How is that not a win?

#355 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-05 02:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

#354 Nothing new in there at all, bch. Where's the part about them being released?

#356 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-05 02:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

Leaving your post for even 30 minutes is a dereliction of duty. So that alone proves he didn't serve with honor and distinction.
#352 | POSTED BY DALTON

Have you ever heard of Under Honorable Conditions (General) discharge? It's not as severe as dishonorable. Leaving your post for 30 minutes would most likely fall under this non-judicial form of punishment. Desertion? Definitely dishonorable.

My point being you shouldn't just focus on the fact that he left his post when considering honorable v. dishonorable. Desertion fits dishonorable quite nicely.

#357 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-05 02:56 PM | Reply | Flag:

Don't have any evidence against them with the war drawing to a close, what did you expect us to do with them?

#354 | Posted by rstybeach11

We're keeping 10,000 troops in Afghanistan. I figured we'd keep holding them.

What you expect us to do with them is not a source for what we are going to do with them.

#358 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-05 02:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

Where's the part about them being released?
#356 | POSTED BY DIXVILLENOTCH

You can't figure that out? No crimes committed. Check. Not terrorists. Check. Guantanamo prison closing within year. Check. War ending so no longer can be considered enemy combatants. Check.

What other conclusions is there to be made?

#359 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-05 02:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

No source. Got it.

#360 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2014-06-05 02:59 PM | Reply | Flag:

What you expect us to do with them is not a source for what we are going to do with them.
#358 | POSTED BY DIXVILLENOTCH

There are thousands of troops in Japan. Are we at war with them? Germany?

The detainees in Guantanamo have the right to habeus corpus (as shown in White House link above). They are no longer enemy combatants so they can no longer be held indefinitely without charge. There is no evidence they committed crimes, hence they cannot be charged. What else can you do with them other than release them?

#361 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-05 03:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

Rsty the investigation will play the degree of punishment if there is a investigation. I'm just pointing out that he left his post. That falls under dereliction of duty. His and his defenders problem is the village he supposedly went to when he asked for someone who spoke english and water was a 1/2 a mile away from his post. You have to put some effort into walking a 1/2 mile. One villager even said he wanted to talk to the Taliban but, I will hold judgement on that until it's investigated. Bottom line is the CIA and Pentagon have a classified file on this soldier so the government knows plenty.

#362 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 03:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

No source. Got it.
#360 | POSTED BY DIXVILLENOTCH

No DIX, I have no source declaring that these specific detainees were going to be released anyways. Sad that you need one.

Now that you know we cannot legally hold them indefinitely (even if we are leaving 10,000 troops in Afghanistan), what did you expect us to do with them?

#363 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-05 03:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'm just pointing out that he left his post. That falls under dereliction of duty.

Yes, without acknowledging that dereliction of duty is vague and does not automatically indicate dishonorable behavior. Under honorable conditions exist as a form of punishment. Or are you suggesting that under honorable is just as bad as dishonorable? If so, I have no argument.

His and his defenders problem is the village he supposedly went to when he asked for someone who spoke english and water was a 1/2 a mile away from his post.
#362 | POSTED BY DALTON

Which, IMO, offers evidence of desertion. I made that point already: I believe him to be a deserter.

#364 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-05 03:10 PM | Reply | Flag:

Legal question:

Does the fact that this administration characterized him as 'serving with honor and distinction' make it legally impossible to have him face a Court Martial?

I know Et Al is lurking around. This should be right up his alley.

#365 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 03:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ok Rsty. That's my conclusion. When you hear that he was asking to talk to the Taliban you have to wonder if he thought he could talk to them and explain how dissapointed he was with the war or what was possibly going through his mind.

#366 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 03:12 PM | Reply | Flag:

His and his defenders problem is the village he supposedly went to when he asked for someone who spoke english and water was a 1/2 a mile away from his post.
#362 | POSTED BY DALTON

Not to nitpick, but the guy that Jake Tapper interviewed said it was 2 miles away. Regardless, it doesn't change your argument.

#367 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 03:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

Ok Rsty. That's my conclusion.
#366 | POSTED BY DALTON

Fair enough.

#368 | Posted by rstybeach11 at 2014-06-05 03:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

I'm no lawyer Jeff but, I would think the military is going to make him answer a alot of questions while comparing what they already know. Remember he doesn't know what they know. Now I can see where Obama tells Hagel to slow walk this recovery. I have no doubt he's severly damaged after five years in captivity mind you but, if it's true the CIA has a file on him you wonder what they know or want to know. I expect that if he merely left his post and was captured they will probably give him a honorable discharge. If it they find collaboration as some have alleged then there may be some there there. I won't go that far at this point but, it's out there.

#369 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 03:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

Not to nitpick, but the guy that Jake Tapper interviewed said it was 2 miles away. Regardless, it doesn't change your argument.

#367 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-06-05 03:14 PM | Reply | Flag

You calling me a liar damnit!

#370 | Posted by Dalton at 2014-06-05 03:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

A service member who is derelict has willfully refused to perform his duties (or follow a given order) or has incapacitated himself in such a way that he cannot perform his duties. Such incapacitation includes the person falling asleep while on duty requiring wakefulness, his getting drunk or otherwise intoxicated and consequently being unable to perform his duties, shooting himself and thus being unable to perform any duty, or his vacating his post contrary to regulations."

I don't see PTSD mentioned or acts of conscience either for that matter. If you have read anything about the 50,000 American desertions in WWII (or the 100,000 British desertions of that time) you will find some soldiers did just walk off the field of battle but to this day (if they were still alive)they could not tell you why (PTSD).

I'm no lawyer Jeff but, I would think the military is going to make him answer a alot of questions while comparing what they already know.

I am no lawyer either (and I don't play one on the internets) but I will bet you right now that in the end this soldier will NOT be convicted of any crime and will end up getting an honorable discharge after the GOTP and you knuckledraggers get done dragging him and his entire family through the muck in order to try and use him to make Obama look bad.

#371 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-06-05 08:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort