1 hour ago, Cory1848 said:

The soldier was charged with first-degree murder and attempted murder (he took potshots at a schoolgirl). He was reported for these crimes by several members of his SEAL platoon, and was tried in a military court by his peers. I am sure that any of these soldiers would dismiss being labeled “pantyhose liberal desk jockeys” with the derision that such juvenile name-calling deserves.

and apparently those peers judged him not guilty except of  taking a photograph.

I assure you none of the soldiers I knew would consider that to be a crime.

8 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

What respect?

Respect from the ranks toward penpushers in offices that never saw action of any kind, sitting in judgement on the men that do?

LOL.

Are you talking about the draft dodger Trump? If so I wholeheartedly agree.

1 hour ago, mtls2005 said:

 

In these cases I don't think he's pandering to his base, exactly. Although the president has said he would like Gallagher to join him on the campaign trail. 

 

He's simply acquiescing to personal appeals (Marc Mukasey, Pete Hesgeth in this case), a la Kim Kardashian/Kanye/A$AP Rocky, et al.

 

Look at the odd pattern of pardons, and awards. It seems pretty easy to get to him, by appealing to his vanity or wallet, and then ask him to exercise his nearly unlimited power.

 

He's attacked nearly every institution, surprised the military lasted this long.

 

Posing with a deceased enemy combatant may or may not violate the UCMJ. Fatally stabbing a 16 YO enemy combatant brought in for medical treatment, and then posing with the body might violate the UCMJ. In a military tribunal, Gallagher was found not guilty of the murder, but was found guilty of "mis-treating" the dead.

 

Gallagher's platoon was said to alter the scope on his rifle as he was said to be fond of sniping civilians.

 

 

Enough of the "was said to" etc. Either he did or it's gossip.

What does the age of the enemy ( and what is with the "combatant" newspeak ) got to do with anything? A soldier's job is to kill the enemy, regardless of age, gender or anything else. 

Some troll posts have been removed. 

10 hours ago, Mac98 said:

He wants service men and women to know they are protected from their own officers if he calls on them to take action anywhere, including the U.S.

OK, i read that bit three times but it doesn't qualify why the CiC inserted his 'pardon' opinion while the case against Gallagher was still underway and hadn't completed the Navy's own very thorough, appropriate and correct judicial review in a court of his peers.

 

In the event that the military tribunal found Gallagher guilty, the POTUS would have been acting within his remit as CiC to grant a pardon at that juncture. However, to insert his judgement prior to the completion of military due process is an act of profound ignorance of jurisprudence and disrespect of the military rule of law. It appears that the Secretary of the Navy Raymond Spencer was fired for ostensibly trying to bypass Defense Secretary Esper to get DJT's ear directly on the Navy's plan to allow Gallagher to retire with his Trident pin... an outcome that DJT and his acolytes seem to claim could only have happened with his intervention and the presidential pardon. Maybe DJT feared being upstaged? Maybe Esper's somewhat disconnected nose was bent out of place? There is an election coming and despite being in perpetual 'winning' mode, dJT does need all the support he can get even if it does include the dead selfie aficionado.

 

In the end, the new, acting Secretary of the Navy felt compelled to stop the subsequent, internal judicial review of Gallagher's immediate superiors for behavior that propagated the case against Gallagher in the first place. Gallagher gets to keep the Trident badge that most people wanted him to retain before retiring. But that right was pending the outcome of that hastily canceled judicial review of three people who apparently allowed him to commit his crimes or otherwise condoned his unquestionably reprehensible conduct. DJT has also now given pardons to them too so all four can keep the SEAL status while the Navy's own efforts to reign-in some undesirable behaviors by some field operatives gets peremptorily shut down.

 

"Janessa Goldbeck, a Marine veteran with the Truman National Security Project says taking this case out of the hands of commanders sends a message to others in the military.

 

"A review board of SEALs is the appropriate next step," Goldbeck says of the Navy's decision to suspend the review hearing of Portier, Breisch and MacNeil. "It's disappointing to see the president undermine his leadership in this way.""

 

https://www.npr.org/2019/11/27/783515686/navy-lets-accused-seals-stay-in-elite-unit

 

As for those that claim they see absolutely nothing wrong with victors in war posing for selfies with the vanquished dead, do you get upset when you witness or see pictures of the locals milling around the bodies in the aftermath of a traffic accident, taking selfies and smiling?

42 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

and apparently those peers judged him not guilty except of  taking a photograph. I assure you none of the soldiers I knew would consider that to be a crime.

All's fair in love and war but how about deeply and profoundly inappropriate?

37 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Enough of the "was said to" etc. Either he did or it's gossip.

What does the age of the enemy ( and what is with the "combatant" newspeak ) got to do with anything?

A soldier's job is to kill the enemy, regardless of age, gender or anything else. 

Since DJT has coerced the newbie Navy Secretary to cancel any peer review of any lapses in command, I guess the fact that the Navy's own tried and tested legal procedures to identify consistent lapses in judgement under fire won't happen, it will forever be 'gossip'.

 

In this age of blurred lines between civilians and enemy combatants then your 'anything else' narrative may get some traction with like-minded souls. However, being allowed to pass the down time between high-pressure missions by taking pot shots at kids and civilians "just because he can" doesn't reflect well on his peers at all.

Some more troll posts have been removed. 

Navy Secretary was an arrogant ******

He doesn't seem to understand chain of command 

Trump is commander in chief.

Follow the order sailor or you're out.

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

and apparently those peers judged him not guilty except of  taking a photograph.

I assure you none of the soldiers I knew would consider that to be a crime.

The bottom line would have been the context and manner of Gallagher's behaviour which caused offence/s. Gallagher was found guilty of contravening the UCMJ. trump has demonstrated time and time again his wilfully destructive decisions and demands thereby eroding the Rule of Law and US Institutions.

 

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2019-11-26/editorial-on-brand-trump-throws-americas-reputation-in-the-trash-to-wink-at-war-criminals

 

trump is unfit to represent the office of the President of the USA. 

On 11/28/2019 at 2:06 PM, Boon Mee said:

Trump is keeping moral high among the members of the military by not bowing down to the liberal panty waists that want see America crippled. 

 

MAGA 

You missed only one word:   criminal.

Then read please:

Trump is keeping criminal moral high among the members of the military by not bowing down to the liberal panty waists that want see America crippled.

On 11/28/2019 at 4:09 PM, John1012 said:

Is taking a picture with a dead terrorist a war crime?

 

 

He was not found guilty, and sentenced to 4 months, for a war crime.

 

He was found guilty of contravening Article 134 of United States UCMJ (Uniformed Code of Military Justice)

 

The court decided it was not a War Crime (as unlawful possession of a controlled substance is not) but still contravened the code.

 

It's all about the UCMJ.

 

Charge #6 on this list:

 

Article 80Attempted Murder

Article 118Premeditated Murder

Article 128Aggravated Assault with a Dangerous Weapon x2 on non-combatants

Article 134Firearm, discharging-willfully, under such circumstances as to endanger human life at non-combatants

Article 134Obstructing Justice (three counts)

Article 134Wrongfully pose for an unofficial picture with a human casualty

Article 134Wrongfully complete reenlistment ceremony next to a human casualty

Article 134Wrongfully Operate a drone over a human casualty

Article 112aWrongful Use of a Controlled Substance – Tramadol Hydrochloride

Article 112aUnlawful Possession of a Controlled Substance – Sustanon-250

 

But the code is not needed any more, all that is needed is for an individual to bring their petition before Emperor Trump.

 

Senate, Congress, Elections, Judges, Generals, Admirals, Scientists, Learning, Education, Knowledge......no longer needed.

 

All that is needed is the Oracle/Emperor, and bread and circuses for his troglodyte accolytes.

 

 

 

 

 

PS Just in case anybody missed it:

 

The pin was taken away from him by his "shipmates", nobody else.

 

 

9 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

and apparently those peers judged him not guilty except of  taking a photograph.

I assure you none of the soldiers I knew would consider that to be a crime.

 

No, his peers (his fellow Senior Enlisted Men) judged him not worthy to wear the pin, during a subsequent low level review.

 

They comprised no "executive" part of the court that judged him guilty of the photograph incident.

 

Two different procedures/events, two different sets of personnel.

 

Could it be that you didn't actually read the very clear explanation of the chain of events that was presented in Spencers article?

 

 

 

 

As Commander-in-chief Trump runs the military and was well within his rights to do this.

 

If people don't like it, they can vote him out of office. 

 

Not gonna happen.  MAGA 2020.

 

 

 

39 minutes ago, Kelsall said:

As Commander-in-chief Trump runs the military and was well within his rights to do this.

 

If people don't like it, they can vote him out of office. 

 

Not gonna happen.  MAGA 2020.

 

 

 

From people who don't like trump there are sometimes posts admitting he made a good decision.

 

Why do I never see a post disagreeing with Trump from his supporters? Do you really agree with everything?

An inflammatory post and the related replies have been removed. 

A post in violation of fair use policy that also contained trolling representations of Trump's name has been removed. 

Top Navy SEAL faces uncertain future after Trump intervention

https://www.yahoo.com/news/top-navy-seal-faces-uncertain-future-after-trump-intervention-100023176.html

 

My opinion is the experienced Navy SEAL command knew they had some internal discipline issues. The experienced Navy SEAL command had a tried, tested and trusted internal review procedure as well as a defined, robust and respected judicial process where one was judged in a court of ones peers. They even found and punished prosecutorial misconduct in the early stages of Gallagher's case. Before DJT intervened, Gallagher himself, fully aware of the damage being caused by this increasingly public airing of soiled Navy SEAL underwear, was willing to surrender his Trident pin and retire as 'never a SEAL' in order to protect the integrity of his former band of brothers.

 

Why DJT chose to set a Presidential precedent here and intervene prior to the conclusion of the investigation only to offer up the pardon that he already had the right as CiC to issue is perplexing.

The entire presidency of Donald J Trump is perplexing 

On 11/29/2019 at 8:30 PM, simple1 said:

The bottom line would have been the context and manner of Gallagher's behaviour which caused offence/s. Gallagher was found guilty of contravening the UCMJ. trump has demonstrated time and time again his wilfully destructive decisions and demands thereby eroding the Rule of Law and US Institutions.

 

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2019-11-26/editorial-on-brand-trump-throws-americas-reputation-in-the-trash-to-wink-at-war-criminals

 

trump is unfit to represent the office of the President of the USA. 

in your opinion, but not of the millions of Americans that voted for him, and will again.

On 11/30/2019 at 4:24 AM, stevenl said:

From people who don't like trump there are sometimes posts admitting he made a good decision.

 

Why do I never see a post disagreeing with Trump from his supporters? Do you really agree with everything?

I disagree with some things he does/ did, but you obviously missed those posts. It has, after all, been 2 1/2 years of posts.

Not going to plow the field again, but I disagree with his Israeli policies almost entirely.

However, I agree with him more than I disagree. That's nothing to do with his party or him personally. I'd agree with any president that did some of the things he has done. Withdrawing from the Pacific grouping, making Europe and other countries pay more for their military protection, dumping the Iranian nuclear deal, dumping the Paris accord, and others- all good.

On 12/1/2019 at 2:23 AM, NanLaew said:

Top Navy SEAL faces uncertain future after Trump intervention

https://www.yahoo.com/news/top-navy-seal-faces-uncertain-future-after-trump-intervention-100023176.html

 

My opinion is the experienced Navy SEAL command knew they had some internal discipline issues. The experienced Navy SEAL command had a tried, tested and trusted internal review procedure as well as a defined, robust and respected judicial process where one was judged in a court of ones peers. They even found and punished prosecutorial misconduct in the early stages of Gallagher's case. Before DJT intervened, Gallagher himself, fully aware of the damage being caused by this increasingly public airing of soiled Navy SEAL underwear, was willing to surrender his Trident pin and retire as 'never a SEAL' in order to protect the integrity of his former band of brothers.

 

Why DJT chose to set a Presidential precedent here and intervene prior to the conclusion of the investigation only to offer up the pardon that he already had the right as CiC to issue is perplexing.

Possibly because once convicted always tainted, even if pardoned.

By preventing a conviction the guy can retire ( as surely he will ) honourably.

OR, to prevent further "soiling" of the SEAL's reputation, to use your term.

President Trump is a wonderful man.  To many Dumbocrats are so full of hate for him it borders on lunacy.   He is the CIC and has the power to make whatever decision he deems the right one.  It's time for many on here to take a chill pill.  Let history decide if DJT is the best President ever! ????

3 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I disagree with some things he does/ did, but you obviously missed those posts. It has, after all, been 2 1/2 years of posts.

Not going to plow the field again, but I disagree with his Israeli policies almost entirely.

However, I agree with him more than I disagree. That's nothing to do with his party or him personally. I'd agree with any president that did some of the things he has done. Withdrawing from the Pacific grouping, making Europe and other countries pay more for their military protection, dumping the Iranian nuclear deal, dumping the Paris accord, and others- all good.

Yes, regarding Israel I agree there are a few on here that seem to support him, but don't support his Israel policies. Including you.