FOX News: Trump grants clemency to 2 Army officers accused of war crimes, restores rank to Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher
President Trump has granted clemency to two Army officers accused or convicted of war crimes and restored Navy SEAL Eddie Gallagher to the rank of chief petty officer after he was docked a pay grade after being convicted of posing for a photo with a dead Islamic State (ISIS) fighter, the White House announced Friday.
Army 1st Lt. Clint Lorance could be released from the military prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, as soon as Friday evening, six years after being found guilty of second-degree murder. Maj. Matt Golsteyn, a former Green Beret, will have the murder charge against him dropped.
Read more ....
More News On President Trump's War Crimes Pardons
Trump just overruled his top military officials in controversial war crimes pardons -- Business Insider
Trump pardons service members in high profile war crimes cases -- USA Today
Trump Clears Three Service Members in War Crimes Cases -- The New York Times
Trump pardons military personnel accused of crimes overseas -- Guardian/AP
Trump ignores Pentagon advice and intervenes in military war crimes cases -- CNN
Trump just issued multiple war crime pardons. Experts think it’s a bad idea. -- VOX News
31 comments:
More than few people have been lit up, when they drove toward troops and did not stop.
Troops of any nation after a few times of getting hit by VBIEDs will start lighting up vehicles that come toward them at a high rate of speed or do not follow commands to stop.
Many a time troops have seen a vehicle approach, ignore commands and when hit explode because it was carrying bombs.
I know of 1 case, where a vehicle was fragged . It was one of ours. The vehicle had dropped out of the convoy and later came up on a convoy at a high rate of speed and would not stop despite being waved off.
People living quietly in comfort in their living room have absolutely no idea what the fog of war is, what the stress being a target is and what facing death anytime is. But they still have a judgment.
May be the day they will be victim of a bombing, they will understand.
Exactly, not only that be you create these efficient killing machines and expect them to turn on off like a light switch.
CHUDS. As a dealership owner, spec ops operator, white man, multi-millionaire, and beneficiary of the Trump tax cut, I can guarantee you a great deal on the 2020 models. CHUDS.
Very pleased and proud that Trump took the time and effort to reverse the bureaucratic lynching of these warriors.
Length of deployments, ridiculous ROE, then the merciless scrutiny they are crushed under when split second, life death decisions are deemed unsatisfactory by nameless faceless military autocrats.
It’s been a general taboo for a president to intervene in these courts. Very glad to see this change.
GOD,
SPEED”,
R,
Having a photo taken with a twisto who thinks nothing of some form of butchery! My my. Bad bad. No no. Now go tell it you're sorry.
Once again we have common sense replacing the tooth fairy mindset by the evil Trump. Remember...the bees won't bother you if you don't bother them. [Notorious and long lived kindergarten fable.]
How about we have a dim-o-crat national debate with all the sillies running for president sharing their feelings with us about such behavior while playing in a rainbow colored sandbox?
There is such a thing as rules of engagement. And when even our top military suggest that such rules be obeyed then pardons are questionable. I know that war will bring crimes about. But I also know from first hand experience that in order to keep order and operations running as designed such accepted rules of conduct should not and have not been ingnored in the past. I rape and murder for example are readily pardoned, then why bother not to rape and murder? Recall Mai Lai?
Recall Mai[sic] Lai?
The problem with My Lai Anon is that you were not brought up on charges, tried, convicted, and sentenced.
You are guilty 8:19 by omission.
During WW2 when the Luftwaffe found Allied airmen Buchenwald concentration camp and maybe not out of the goodness of the hearts. Their hearts might have been in the right place, but that alone might not sufficient for them to act and go against the Gestapo. They were afraid that if captured Allied airmen were executed that captured German airmen would be executed. So they were sufficiently steeled to go up against the dreaded secret police.
Phil Lamason and 167 other airmen were saved.
People like you suffer no penalty to date for 1/2 assing wars, material unreadiness, and an expressed unwillingness to stand up to evil.
You tell 1/2 truths like that of the execution of Nguyễn Văn Lém. Terrible thing that ... Nguyễn Văn Lém being summarily shot? But he was not covered by the Geneva Convention. He was in civilian clothes. It puts him in the same category as a spy. Plus he slit the throats of women the elderly and children. He was a mass murderer. But it did not matter; it became cause célèbre.
You should walk more than a mile in a frontline grunt's shoes. A front line grunt and not some JAG-OFFicer, intel weenie, or other REMF, who helicopters in spending a brief time in a secured zone.
Combatants wearing civilian clothes and attacking uniformed soldiers is a big problem and you have never been under that stress, so you should STFU.
Anon
before you dump on me, I had done work in a war zone with crimes that were brought up by our military against our troops. The essence behind punishing such wrongs? If we do X to them, then they will do X to us...
18 U.S.C. § 2441 - U.S. Code - Unannotated Title 18. Crimes and Criminal Procedure § 2441. War crimes
My Lai and 3 men on a motor cycle approaching at a high rate of speed are apples and oranges.
Seen to many films of VBIEDs being lit up and the troops being right. And a few of those times they are going to be wrong and you will be there to pick over the bones and feather your
nest.
Of late I have seen too many politicians or scions of political houses, who go down the road of intel or JAG. It is clear to me they want to check the veteran box on the punch list without having to risk too much skin. So IMO they have no skin in the game as Obama would put it.
I do not think you have a clear or proper understanding of psychology. You can brave a circumstance once and come through it without fault. You go through the same circumstance ad infinitum and you will have a steady trickle of those who fail. You prosecute that? I look at it from in part a statistical point of view, which is why I rethought and rewrote from walk a mile in someone;s shoes to "more than a mile"
I have seen WW2 gun camera footage of P51 pilots shooting women and children with .30 & .50 calibre. Those pilots were never prosecuted. Should they have been?
You can watch the documentaries even today.
Should they have been?
Russ, Colonel Blimp has cancelled your weekend leave and given you 48 hrs. of KP duty. Those taters won't peel themselves, now get to work!
MAGA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Some people have a semi-accurate view of what the military was like 50 years ago or longer.
They make a quip based on it and think they are funnier than sh__.
1945 Strafing Farmers on Horse Drawn Vehicles!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6cl4TvZopA
www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/3nla50/allied_gun_camera_of_strafing_attacks_on_horse/
For a group of people that pride themselves on toughness, the troops sure do whine a lot.
"Combat is stressful, that's why I incinerated those babies". That's a convenient excuse for mass murder.
Don't get me wrong, USA is still super cool. A shining city on the hill that invades countries and steals their stuff.
Now will Buttigieg who breathlessly relates stories of driving around Kabul.
It's more than many have done. But it's a whole lot less than the people he's now sliming,
... Buttigieg hasn't faced those choices, but he's happy to exploit the lives and deaths of those who have to advance his tawdry political career and social climbing ambitions anyway.
But that's a good summary of his entire career.
I have a parent who who was born and grew up in a country invaded by the USA. I salso married a 'communist'. So I think I have a fair assessment of war, war crimes, etc. You not so much.
I can say a lot to glib MFer like you 10:26, but since you're a keyboard warrior it is not possible.
Bandwidth being what it is.
"My Lai"
Explain again the justification for the US being in Vietnam.
No Bob. Explain why they should not have been.
Anon
Okay, so you don't know why?
Instead of us explaining, you go talk to a few of the many S. Viets who risked life and limb to come to this country and others. And after leaving N. Vietnam in the 50's with the partition.
If the desire for freedom and a better life isn't evident in their decisions back then there is no need to attempt to explain to you today. The product speaks for itself.
Maybe you should explain why Uncle Ho was responsible for 1.1 million N.Vietnamese losing their lives [N.Viet gov figures]in a country that wasn't theirs in order to erase an imaginary line for Uncle Ho.
My Lai. Do you have the names of any Viet cong/N. Viet massacres in S. Vietnam? Or does your computer freeze from overload when you ask?
Bob,
I do not accept your characterization or premise.
After the Boat People, the Fall of the Berlin Wall, the Venona Papers and the Fall of the USSR, you should be embarrassed to keep with the same premise you have had for 50 years.
Speaking of intel officer Pete Buttigieg, he is phonier than a $3 bill.
Pete Buttigieg Puts Out List of 400 South Carolina Black Supporters:
- 42% Are White,
- Many Didn’t Endorse and
- Pete Used Generic Stock Photo FROM KENYA to Promote the List
Maybe Pete is not very good at intel work?
Roger/Anon
I was not actually looking for an answer to my comment "Explain again the justification for the US being in Vietnam." hence the lack of a question mark.
That is because basically there was no justification to "invade" that country, your comments notwithstanding. And of course that final decision to invade was based on a lie.
Had there been a legitimate justification the US would have actually done what was necessary to defeat the "enemy". They obviously couldn't, maybe for whatever reason, just didn't.
I agree that the incidents of atrocities described in your response were for sure atrocious and needed addressing. Addressing by whom is the question.
But history shows that there was no justification for America entering what was basically a civil war.
All demonstrated bravery, valor and atrocities, on both sides, aside, ultimately Vietnam become a united peaceful, prosperous nation, after America's departure.
America on entering that civil war created a serious protraction of that war and of course atrocities which might have been reduced but not only continued and were exacerbated, on both sides, because America entered the conflict.
I believe that the cost to Americans in terms of its own military's loses should be viewed as an atrocity against the American government of the day for sending there youth to fight an unwinnable war in someone else's back yard.
It is easy to judge what went wrong, what could/should have been done but wasn't looking back and such reviews, conducted honestly should impact decisions on future similar activities such as instigating war, death and destruction. Pity, for whatever reason such lessons are often forgotten or simply disregarded.
Disagree with my comment if you want but I have yet to see a believable justification for America's entry into that civil war.
Bob,
Your dishonest comment "Explain again the justification for the US being in Vietnam."
whether posed as an interrogative or a declarative is just that a dishonest comment.
"what was basically a civil war."
So Catholics and Buddhists have to live under communist rule by communists, who are supported by Moscow and Beijing>? People actually voted with their feet and left their homes so as to practice their religion.
"a serious protraction of that war"
Because it would have been much better if the North Vietnamese had crossed the border from the start with Russian and Chinese weapons and simply went to reeducation camps and executions 10 years earlier. That is what you really mean Bob. You belong in a 劳改.
"a united peaceful, prosperous nation, after America's departure."
NAZI Germany was peaceful too in 1938. Jews and communists had been beaten up in the streets or shipped off to camps.
The 1st 2 5-year plans failed after the 1975. The Good Communist Oligarchs of Vietnam had to dump communism and they did in 1986. Things really did not substantially improve for Vietnam until 2015, a generation after the fall of Saigon.
"But history shows that there was no justification..."
there was justification for spreading Communism by the barrel of a gun in Vietnam, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, etc
Bob, just how big of a fuck are you?
Year 1956 1958 1960 1962 1964 1966 1968 1970 1972 1974
RoV 62 88 105 100 118 100 85 81 90 65
DRV 40 50 51 68 59 60 55 60 60 65
Face it Bob,. you are a propaganda pushing prog.
Anon
Still trying to justify that which cannot be justified. Lame.
Still trying to make an American military disaster look like victory. Lame.
Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi invited President Donald Trump to testify in front of investigators in the House impeachment inquiry ahead of a week that will see several key witnesses appear publicly, the AP reports. Pushing back against accusations from the president that the process has been stacked against him, Pelosi said Trump is welcome to appear or answer questions in writing, if he chooses. "If he has information that is exculpatory, that means ex, taking away, culpable, blame, then we look forward to seeing it," she said in an interview that aired Sunday on CBS' Face the Nation. Trump "could come right before the committee and talk, speak all the truth that he wants if he wants," she said. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer echoed that suggestion.
"If Donald Trump doesn't agree with what he's hearing, doesn't like what he's hearing, he shouldn't tweet. He should come to the committee and testify under oath. And he should allow all those around him to come to the committee and testify under oath," Schumer told reporters. He said the White House’s insistence on blocking witnesses from cooperating begs the question: "What is he hiding?" The comments come as the House Intelligence Committee prepares for a second week of public hearings, including with the man who is arguably the most important witness. Gordon Sondland, Trump's ambassador to the EU, is the only person interviewed to date who had conversations directly with the president about his apparent plan to pressure Ukraine into investigating Joe and Hunter Biden.
Anon
You busted nothing. In fact you validated my post making my point even stronger.
All the stuff you listed that was done to those people, what they had to suffer was terrible, but then the US went in and did it to them again enhanced with chemical weapons and in the process showed the world that America was not only no better than the earlier crowd, but also, so poor militarily-wise they had to run away in the end.
The invitation to Trump is interesting as is the public aspect of the hearings.
As for the invitation:
- If he does not avail himself of the offer he undermines the "credibility" of his tweeting making it look desperate,
- If he avails himself of the offer he would be giving some level of credence to the hearings. If he conducts himself in a boisterous, perhaps rowdy fashion he would show disrespect for a legal process. He might have to be ejected if it was possible to eject a President.
I can't imagine him just sitting there as a spectator so my guess is that he will decline on the basis of the hearings being irrelevent, perhaps even illegal.
As for the Public Hearings
- The public hearings, almost court like in appearance, televised, reported/commented on daily could create a general feeling that in fact Trump has already been "tried", if the is the right term for the Senate's portion of the process. Then if in the Senate, dominated by Republicans, the case is heard and receives a perfunctory-like dismissal the integrity of the GOP in the Senate could incite criticism, perhaps repercussions in the election. That is if the public believe that what they saw in the hearings suggested Trump was guilty and should be fired.
Bob claimed that everything was working well economically after 1975. He lied, but hey it is Bobby. They stagnated a whole generation.
Then Bobbie moves on to another topic.
about that topic Bob.
"if in the Senate, dominated by Republicans, the case is heard and receives a perfunctory-like dismissal the integrity of the GOP in the Senate could incite criticism"
At that time the Democrats are going to fold as new witnesses are brought in and nothing and I mean nothing will be closed door.
Bit maybe you ought to be worried that Hudson bay freezes over earlier and earlier, You better worry about your heating bill or if you can stay warm at all. You are not that far away for all that ice and cold.
Earlier every year.
Post a Comment