Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it cou

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Thrilla said:

if the servicemember is recognized as a prisoner of war, there will be no holds placed on promotions that arise through TIR/TIS... if he is not officially charged with a crime under the UCMJ, they can't withhold promotion.

if an investigation warrants a court martial.. and they convict him of desertion... don't sweat it.. he'll be demoted retroactively and most of his money will be taken... he'll also serve a lengthy sentence.
if convicted, he's also eligible for he death penalty, but that probably won't happen.

Click to expand...

Being a POW is different from the two differences in status Gaius46 described. Thus, your assessment of the situation I certainly agree with assuming PFC Berdhaul was, in fact, designated as MIA/POW and not AWOL or listed as a deserter.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Objective Voice said:

Being a POW is different from the two differences in status Gaius46 described. Thus, your assessment of the situation I certainly agree with assuming PFC Berdhaul was, in fact, designated as MIA/POW and not AWOL or listed as a deserter.

Click to expand...

the facts are still real hazy, so i'm not taking a stand on any of this... but if it's true he was promoted during his absence, he wasn't charged with with any of the punitive articles of the UCMJ.
he still can be, but i'm still assuming he hasn't as of yet.

hopefully it will come out in the laundry..

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Objective Voice said:

I still believe in the impeachment process as outlined in the Constitution.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure how one could still believe in that as anything other than an exercise in politics.... it's been proven to be so right in front of our eyes.

However, I just don't believe Pres. Obama has committed an impeachable offense during his presidency. Let's look at the facts:

Click to expand...

no need ot have a rundown of the scandals.. it's enough to say none of the investigations has been allowed to progress on those items.... the executive branch ,over the decades, has become very good at preventing anyone from holding them accountable.. stonewalling is an effective strategy.. a strategy that your average citizen cannot use.
my point was based more upon his fellow Democrats in Congress claiming he has broken the law... whether that is true or not, i can't say... whether it rises to the level of impeach, again, i can't say

Even this Gitmo issue is a "Catch-22" because although the President may have violated a provision of a law (not even sure which one was violated in this case...would have to do some research), who would actually take him to task for doing whatever he could to bring home one of our men and women in uniform? You can argue that he "negotiated with terrorist" all you want. You can argue that the POW whose release he negotiated for has a questionable military record. But in the end no one who calls themselves a patriots would agree to the alternative: leave one of our own behind indefinitely in the hands of the enemy. I certainly don't like the 5:1 deal that was made, but in the grand scheme of things I seriously doubt that anyone would agree to do nothing.

Click to expand...

if it turns out this guy is a deserter, it will definitely be a big ass blemish on the administration.. especially when you take into consideration that we have other personnel who they are not expending any efforts on.

is is false to state that opposing this deal somehow negates someones patriotism.. i think it's a bit premature to outright oppose bringing him home, but if the rumors are true that he wasn't a POW but a willing guest.. .well, **** him, I will have no sympathy for him at that time... at that point, he is no longer "one of us".. he's "one of them"

as it stands now, i'm fine with bringing him home.. but i do expect the military to fully investigate him.. hopefully without interference from the administration.

most people are fine with "doing nothing".. at the very most, they pay lip service... this kid isn't the only guy we have in captivity... he's just the only one the President decided to make a deal for.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Objective Voice said:

Deserter...AWOL...one's a lesser degree of the other. Neither warrants promoting a soldier while he's away from his post during an unauthorized absence.

Click to expand...

I agree. I'd be curious to know why he was promoted while AWOL as well.

And I think it's a bit of an understatement to say AWOL is a lesser degree of desertion. DP'ers with military background can better speak to it but I think desertion is far more serious. In certain situations they can execute you for desertion. Not so with being AWOL.

Re: Kings, tyrants and those who really don't care

Misterveritis said:

Really. Can you point to the American laws that might apply?

And can you equally point to that portion of the Geneva Convention rules of law that apply?


Until I reached the end I was going down a different path. It really doesn't matter.

"I guess my bottom line is that I really don't care whether they're soldiers as the word is defined by the Geneva conventions..."

And it doesn't matter to me whether Bergdahl is ultimately a deserter or not."

You don't care and it does not matter. Obama could have spoken those same words as he broke the law. Obama thinks he is our King. In reality he is a tyrant. And you?

Click to expand...

As to American Law - I was wrong on that point. Under the Military Commissions Act an alien unlawful combatant can be tried by a military commission. Though I'm not sure if a military tribunal meets the Geneva Convention requirement for a "regularly constituted court"


How about quoting me in context?

On your first point I said "I guess my bottom line is that I really don't care whether they're soldiers as the word is defined by the Geneva conventions or civilians. The distinction doesn't matter in the real world. "
And I went to say that the distinction doesn't matter because whether they lawful or unlawful combatants once returned to their people they can kill our soldiers.

As I stated before the big complaint is that these 5 people will go out and kill our soldiers now. Well what about the THOUSANDS of soldiers we've swapped with the North Vietnamese, the North Koreans and the Germans? And that's just in this century. Was it somehow okay to let those people back on the field to potentially kill our soldiers simply because they wore a uniform? Arrant nonsense. If those exchanges were okay you cannot with any kind of logical consistency condemn this exchange, your position has not one shred of reasoning behind it and I conclude you object simply because you hate Obama.

On my second statement, I don't care if Bergdahl is a deserter or not. But you see reasons matter. You left off my reasoning specifically to give the impression that I support the man. I do not.
As I said before, he belongs here because if he isn't a deserter he deserves to be freed and a 5 for 1 swap is a good deal in my book. If he is a deserter he needs to face our military justice system and be punished for his crimes.

If you are going to quote me in the future quote me in full. Having to say the same thing twice because you quote me out of context and and edited the crap out of my posts is tiresome and honestly makes you look childish.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Ockham said:

No - let him continue to **** up for the next two years please. Impeaching him only will give the lefty loons more "racist" labels to hand out. Obama and his administration is a walking abortive nightmare for Democrats. Is it too late to elect him again so Democrat policy gets set back 100 years and is ridiculed for another 100?

Click to expand...

Exactly. The democrats...especially those facing re-election are in a quandary. They want to distance themselves from Obama on issues such as obamacare and the prisoner swap however they are scared to death over the thought of criticizing the first African American president. It's just not politically correct.:lol:

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Gaius46 said:

The United States didn't recognize Jefferson Davis' government either. From that perspective the entire Confederate Army were unlawful combatants. Yet we swapped prisoners with them. Is Lincoln guilty of giving aid and comfort?


And in any case it's a distinction wholly without merit. You speak as if released "legal combatants" didn't go back to their units and kill our soldiers.

What's your axe to grind with Holder?

Click to expand...

However Lincoln did not trade the equivalent of the top four star generals of the confederate army. Those were not low level comabatants picked up on the battlefield that Obama traded. They were top level murderous bastards. Releasing them will certainly come back to haunt us. And Lincoln did not trade for deserters.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Ockham said:

Freeing an accused deserter and giving away the highest level Taliban planners who killed thousands? Easy peasy, but I'd still suggest not to.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Impeachment is not going to happen. And even if it did, there have only been two presidential impeachments in our history...and neither of them ended with the Senate tossing them out of office. Let him finis his second term. The democrat party will be decades recovering from his presidency.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Misterveritis said:

No. He is the nation's worst enemy. He needs to be impeached, then arrested, and tried.

Click to expand...

I would love that...however it's not going to happen. Just sit back and enjoy watching the democrat party implode.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Fenton said:

I think this kid was very impressionable, and I think his Father helped to coach him right off that base and into the first Taliban outpost.

If you read the E-mails between him and his Father it's like his Dad was building him up, affirming his twisted and growing anti US sentiments.

Once the Taliban got him, he was all too willing to help them in anyway possible.

I'm not trying to justify what he did, and he should pay for the crime of desertion and maybe worse but it seems this kid was pretty easy to manipulate.

Click to expand...

Yes....looking at his father's strange behavior it's certainly easy to see how that kid is so screwed up.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Misterveritis said:

Is that all you have? Ask Israel? Did they swap war criminals for a deserter?

Click to expand...

And the big difference with Israel is that every terrorist nation in the middle east fears Israel. No nation on the planet fears Obama.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Lord of Planar said:

Biden would be the incumbent president.

Not very wise to impeach him.

Click to expand...

The steady stream of Biden gaffes would be hilarious though.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Lord of Planar said:

States rights. Obama steps all over the 10th.

Click to expand...

States rights only goes so far. That is why the Articles of Confederation failed.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

danarhea said:

States rights only goes so far. That is why the Articles of Confederation failed.

Click to expand...

They're specifically defined under the Tenth amendment.

Re: Kings, tyrants and those who really don't care

Gaius46 said:

As to American Law - I was wrong on that point. Under the Military Commissions Act an alien unlawful combatant can be tried by a military commission. Though I'm not sure if a military tribunal meets the Geneva Convention requirement for a "regularly constituted court"


How about quoting me in context?

On your first point I said "I guess my bottom line is that I really don't care whether they're soldiers as the word is defined by the Geneva conventions or civilians. The distinction doesn't matter in the real world. "
And I went to say that the distinction doesn't matter because whether they lawful or unlawful combatants once returned to their people they can kill our soldiers.

As I stated before the big complaint is that these 5 people will go out and kill our soldiers now. Well what about the THOUSANDS of soldiers we've swapped with the North Vietnamese, the North Koreans and the Germans? And that's just in this century. Was it somehow okay to let those people back on the field to potentially kill our soldiers simply because they wore a uniform? Arrant nonsense. If those exchanges were okay you cannot with any kind of logical consistency condemn this exchange, your position has not one shred of reasoning behind it and I conclude you object simply because you hate Obama.

On my second statement, I don't care if Bergdahl is a deserter or not. But you see reasons matter. You left off my reasoning specifically to give the impression that I support the man. I do not.
As I said before, he belongs here because if he isn't a deserter he deserves to be freed and a 5 for 1 swap is a good deal in my book. If he is a deserter he needs to face our military justice system and be punished for his crimes.

If you are going to quote me in the future quote me in full. Having to say the same thing twice because you quote me out of context and and edited the crap out of my posts is tiresome and honestly makes you look childish.

Click to expand...

I quoted you just fine. I grayed out the thin veneer so what you were actually saying was clear.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Fenton said:

They're specifically defined under the Tenth amendment.

Click to expand...

No they aren't. They are defined in the rest of the Constitution. The 10th Amendment merely states that rights not defined in the Constitution belong to the States and to the people. But that has nothing to do with prisoner swaps, since we are talking about the military, which is run by the Federal government. Show me where states rights plays into this. Your answer ought to be very interesting. LOL.

Re: Kings, tyrants and those who really don't care

Misterveritis said:

I quoted you just fine. I grayed out the thin veneer so what you were actually saying was clear.

Click to expand...

So you think your fellow DP'ers are so stupid that they need you to grey out my words so they can see my hidden meaning? Okay got it.
No point in continuing this discussion.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

danarhea said:

No they aren't. They are defined in the rest of the Constitution. The 10th Amendment merely states that rights not defined in the Constitution belong to the States and to the people. But that has nothing to do with prisoner swaps, since we are talking about the military, which is run by the Federal government. Show me where states rights plays into this. Your answer ought to be very interesting. LOL.

Click to expand...

Interesting. LP's comments were in response to Obamacare. Interfering in individual health decisions is not a Constitutional power. It may be a state power but it is certainly an individual power. Or rather it used to be.

And on the topic you brought up...

Has any president before this one ever swapped war criminals for a likely deserter?

Re: Kings, tyrants and those who really don't care

Gaius46 said:

So you think your fellow DP'ers are so stupid that they need you to grey out my words so they can see my hidden meaning? Okay got it.
No point in continuing this discussion.

Click to expand...

If they wished they could go back to see your entire statement.

As far as being done that is a choice you have.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Misterveritis said:

Interesting. LP's comments were in response to Obamacare. Interfering in individual health decisions is not a Constitutional power. It may be a state power but it is certainly an individual power. Or rather it used to be.

And on the topic you brought up...

Has any president before this one ever swapped war criminals for a likely deserter?

Click to expand...

1) He shouldn't have tried to change the subject.

2) We don't know that he is a deserter until he has been tried and convicted. Don't like it? Then move to Iran, where you will like the way things are run much better.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

danarhea said:

1) He shouldn't have tried to change the subject.

Click to expand...

And you should try to answer what was posted.

2) We don't know that he is a deserter until he has been tried and convicted. Don't like it? Then move to Iran, where you will like the way things are run much better.

Click to expand...

This is your argument for your gross, overbearing, incorrect answer? Check your underwear. You give evidence that they are too tight.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

votemout said:

Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL and could lead to Obama's IMPEACHMENT | Mail Online

Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it could lead to Obama's impeachment

The president ignored a law – which he signed last year – requiring him to notify Congress 30 days before releasing anyone from Guantanamo Bay
The Obama administration never told Capitol Hill until after Bergdahl was in American custody and the US Taliban prisoners were preparing to leave
A former federal prosecutor told MailOnline that while the 30-day-notice law is probably unconstitutional, putting enemy combatants back in a position to harm Americans is an impeachable offense
A White House insider said Obama administration officials didn't anticipate how controversial Bergdahl's rescue would be, and compared it to the 1981 release of 52 US hostages in Iran

Click to expand...

Where are the names of the senior congressional Republicans quoted in this article? Without a name it loses validity.

Or perhaps this is just PR for

'The return of senior terrorists to the Taliban [is] ... a "high crime and misdemeanor",' author Andrew C. McCarthy told MailOnline.

His book 'Faithless Execution: Building the case for Obama's impeachment,' is set to be published Tuesday.

Click to expand...

This is just another clown promoting his book. FAIL

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Crosscheck said:

Where are the names of the senior congressional Republicans quoted in this article? Without a name it loses validity.

Or perhaps this is just PR for

This is just another clown promoting his book. FAIL

Click to expand...

Helps to read the article past oh the first few paragraphs
Obama 'clearly violated laws which require him to notify Congress thirty days before any transfer of terrorists from Guantanamo Bay, and to explain how the threat posed by such terrorists has been substantially mitigated,' House Armed Services Committee chairman Rep. Buck McKeon of California and Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Sen. JIm Inhofe of Oklahoma said Saturday.

An official Pentagon report in 2010 concluded that he 'walked away' from his post, so the U.S. Army did not exert any extraordinary efforts to find him after an initial flurry of searches, according to an insider who spoke to the Associated Press.



but i guess you prefer to not be informed? maybe it might make your president look bad?

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

votemout said:

Helps to read the article past oh the first few paragraphs
Obama 'clearly violated laws which require him to notify Congress thirty days before any transfer of terrorists from Guantanamo Bay, and to explain how the threat posed by such terrorists has been substantially mitigated,' House Armed Services Committee chairman Rep. Buck McKeon of California and Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Sen. JIm Inhofe of Oklahoma said Saturday.

An official Pentagon report in 2010 concluded that he 'walked away' from his post, so the U.S. Army did not exert any extraordinary efforts to find him after an initial flurry of searches, according to an insider who spoke to the Associated Press.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately the man-child president in 2014 saw it as an opportunity to spill another five of the Taliban's worse characters out of Gitmo without thinking about the danger he is putting remaining US troops in Afghanistan through.

Re: Taliban prisoner swap was ILLEGAL claims GOP as former federal prosecutor says it

Sorry, but I won't read through this thread. If Obama broke the law, take him to court. Otherwise, yer just boring the eff outa me.