Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [spot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
spot wrote:
gofigure wrote:
spot wrote:
Guffaw wrote:
Eddie Gallagher is a POS deserving of war crimes court date and likely a noose. Its a poor reflection on the US Military that he 'got away' with a single charge of murder on a POW. It would be a terrible reflection on the USA if he was pardoned. Even many of his Navy SEALs think he is a POS. https://www.navytimes.com/...out-eddie-gallagher/

With the lack of accountability for the evil acts, the narrative that the US is the 'good guy' in global affairs is harder and harder to spin throughout most of the world.


Did you actually read the entire article that you linked? Because while he may well be a POS and should be behind bars, there is not a whole lot of evidence against him, other than mostly second and third hand testimony. There is (or was) apparently some question whether or not he killed anybody. Not to mention the fact that there is evidence that some of those witnesses wanted to get together to "make sure their story jibed" before testifying to the NCIS.

This is not to say he should be pardoned; I think the trial should continue and let justice take its course. But it seems to me you are jumping to some conclusions that the facts may not support.


Navy prosecutors argue that Gallagher's accusers showed "the courage and integrity to come forward and report". So if a pardon pre-conviction is offered and taken, then the they sayers ought be believed.


I don't understand how that logically follows. If Gallagher gets pardoned, then that means the accusers should then be believed? How does a pardon have anything to do with their veracity?

Again, for the record, I'm not for a pardon here. I think a courts martial should determine the veracity of his accusers. But your statement doesn't make any sense to me.

My thinking here, and I might be wrong, but acceptance of a pardon before conviction is a passive admission of guilt and hence his boys were not ginning up some BS just to get back at him and were to be believed.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [gofigure] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Let’s assume he didn’t do any of these things.

Given the option of going to trial and possibly jail for a long time or “admitting” to something you didn’t do then getting your record cleared...

Yeah real tough choice.

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Last edited by: BLeP: May 21, 19 17:37
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [gofigure] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Quote:
And, Trump still has the option to pardon himself.

I used to think he was fundamentally unfit for office. The more I think about it, it's actually perfect for him.

All the power, media attention, and money generating potential one can imagine, with absolutely no accountability whatsoever.

The devil made me do it the first time, second time I done it on my own - W
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [sphere] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
//All the power...//

I think Trump highlights all of the reasons we should not give so much power to the office of the POTUS. I hope, but highly doubt, we will learn this lesson and make some changes.

We can complain all we want about ‘bad’ pardons, but he has the absolute power. Period.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [gofigure] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Well Mr. Trump has some sketchy pardons starting with Sheriff Joe, but has actually been a bit stingy with his pardons compared to the 1,500 pardons/clemency that Mr. Obama granted. (the most since Truman). There must have been a bunch of meth dealers wrongfully convicted during the Obama administration reading the convictions lists. But what the hell that is a crazy part of Executive Power given to the president. Time will tell if soldiers pissing on dead people, whacking a POW, bank fraud, drug dealing, murder or just being Sheriff Joe is more distasteful. I am sure there are more than a couple of folks more pissed at Enron or Bernie Madoff for ruining the lives of people than some other guys that got a Presidential pardon.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [sphere] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sphere wrote:
His pardons appear unprecedented in two distinct ways: the overt political-personal focus, and the absence of a formal DOJ review process.

In other words, he just pardons whomever he wants to, for his own personal reasons. That's not abuse of power at all, I guess. The ball washers here are locked into their circular logic that as long as it's legal, there's nothing to see here, and because he's POTUS, nothing is illegal, so it's his right, and therefore totally fine...

The Black pardon, in particular, really tests the limits of what is appropriate. But as with many other norms, Trump is happy to bulldoze it.

First, I apologize for drastically editing your exhaustive and compelling case. I do agree completely and this is the reason why I am torn about these potential military justice intercession pardons. Although our TDS is strong, there has to be something more to our concern than that animus. Of the cases before Trump now the only one that I am in favor of a pardon is those USMC snipers who urinated on the dead bodies of Taliban fighters. I empathize with these young enlisted men a bit more than the others. If for a personal, politically overt or self serving reason, Trump pardons these boys, then I am fine with that. As to the others, those reasons don't carry the same weight.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
No argument with your point. Which then should go into the argument that Trump, and his want to pardon, ought to at least let military justice run it's course before acting.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [burnthesheep] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
burnthesheep wrote:
Why?

He has a big fan base of voters who have adopted the personas or have sick fascinations with the whole "Punisher" thing and glorification of violence subset of society.
And why I am torn because....

These same people seem to have weird sick personal fascinations with the very real, very difficult profession of snipers.

...some of us have an appropriately healthy and patriotic appreciation of the very difficult profession of these snipers.

It's a fascination with the personification of reaching out and punishing a group of people they perceive to have wronged America or some how disenfranchised the "persecuted white male Christian" through the lens of a sniper scope.

There is a sickness there that those snipers might not want association with.

Nothing wrong at all with respecting and praying for our soldiers. Entirely different to hold sick personal fantasies and fan club like mentalities about killing people.

Yes, entirely different.

No joke......I've seen bumper stickers locally supporting that marine guy he wants to pardon. It's out there.


And the owners of those bumpers vote.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [HandHeartCrown] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
HandHeartCrown wrote:
Goosedog wrote:
gofigure wrote:
Wapo has editorialized:

"Mr Trump would undermine the military by pardoning those who violated laws of war......
Pardons in these cases would undermine discipline in the ranks, impede cooperation with citizens and fighters of other nations, and insult millions of service members who have behaved honorably.....show weakness, corroding the professionalism and humanity of the armed forces."


Nah, MAGA.


If that wasn't intended to be in pink font, can to please elaborate?

I tread insecurely into deep waters whenever the give and take of pink intent, or not, is raised. Since goosedog has not elaborated, then surely it was intended pink and he is chuckling mightily over our denseness. Or, he is one of the ballwashers and really has no meaningful counterpoint.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [G-man] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
G-man wrote:
Well Mr. Trump has some sketchy pardons starting with Sheriff Joe, but has actually been a bit stingy with his pardons compared to the 1,500 pardons/clemency that Mr. Obama granted. (the most since Truman). There must have been a bunch of meth dealers wrongfully convicted during the Obama administration reading the convictions lists. But what the hell that is a crazy part of Executive Power given to the president. Time will tell if soldiers pissing on dead people, whacking a POW, bank fraud, drug dealing, murder or just being Sheriff Joe is more distasteful. I am sure there are more than a couple of folks more pissed at Enron or Bernie Madoff for ruining the lives of people than some other guys that got a Presidential pardon.

So it goes," with great power comes great responsibility." Spiderman or Voltaire?
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [gofigure] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gofigure wrote:
burnthesheep wrote:
Why?

He has a big fan base of voters who have adopted the personas or have sick fascinations with the whole "Punisher" thing and glorification of violence subset of society.
And why I am torn because....

These same people seem to have weird sick personal fascinations with the very real, very difficult profession of snipers.

...some of us have an appropriately healthy and patriotic appreciation of the very difficult profession of these snipers.

It's a fascination with the personification of reaching out and punishing a group of people they perceive to have wronged America or some how disenfranchised the "persecuted white male Christian" through the lens of a sniper scope.

There is a sickness there that those snipers might not want association with.

Nothing wrong at all with respecting and praying for our soldiers. Entirely different to hold sick personal fantasies and fan club like mentalities about killing people.

Yes, entirely different.

No joke......I've seen bumper stickers locally supporting that marine guy he wants to pardon. It's out there.


And the owners of those bumpers vote.

Can't disagree with any of that.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [gofigure] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gofigure wrote:
US Navy seal CPO Gallagher (murder yet convicted),

Focusing on this one. Riveting testimony today. Key witness for the prosecution suddenly tries to claim *he*, not Gallagher, committed the murder while on the stand. This is the stuff of TV drama.

I don't know how this works. Since the witness had immunity and apparently *nothing* he says can be used against him, is this like a true legal game that can be played so that no one can be charged with the murder? It seems the only thing the witness can be charged with is perjury, not murder. Or can the witness' attempt at confession simply be discounted as a lie?

The testimony of all the other witnesses seems pretty damning to me. Interesting how this turns out.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [gofigure] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Every President seems to pardon pieces of shit.

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [TheStroBro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TheStroBro wrote:
Every President seems to pardon pieces of shit.

That's because criminals are (quite often) pieces of shit.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [sphere] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
sphere wrote:
Quote:
And, Trump still has the option to pardon himself.


I used to think he was fundamentally unfit for office. The more I think about it, it's actually perfect for him.

All the power, media attention, and money generating potential one can imagine, with absolutely no accountability whatsoever.

Zaphod Beeblebrox.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [TheStroBro] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TheStroBro wrote:
Every President seems to pardon pieces of shit.

Yes. People who did committed crimes but had (misguided) good intentions (eco-terrorists or social justice warriors who didn't hurt anyone). People who committed non violent crimes and have a sympathetic story. People who belong to 'upper society' and did rich people crimes - i.e. insider trading, embezzling

But people who use a military action as an excuse to get off on murdering civilians, including women and children? People who execute and tortured prisoners? That this is real war crimes stuff right there. And by minimizing it with a simple 'murder charge', or worse, pardoning, it makes the US Military look like a force for evil. The bad guy.

Remember - It's important to be comfortable in your own skin... because it turns out society frowns on wearing other people's
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [gofigure] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Not to take away from the discussion about Trump being a huge POS for even considering pardoning these criminals, but the Navy and the DoD needs to take a hard look at the SEAL community.

It has always been composed of far too many cowboys that think they are above the law. Over the past several years there have been multiple reports of rampant breaches of discipline, substance abuse, sexual assaults, etc that are out of proportion with their size. Our country did a significant ramp up of the number of SEAL teams in the last 18 years and all of the worst characteristics and stereotypes of SEALs seem to only have been magnified.

This admission (which given how it came about, I am going to be doubtful of its truthfulness) by SWO 1st Class Corey Scott that he- with an immunity deal- not Chief Gallagher killed an captive is a prime example of how the SEALs have a fundamental problem.

Quote:
Prosecutors were visibly upset by the turn of events.
"They pointed out that [Scott] had spoken to prosecutors several times; they'd asked him to go step by step in this, and that he had never mentioned closing off the airway and he'd never said that in any of his testimony to naval investigators either," Walsh said.
The prosecution accused Scott of being untruthful and said he fabricated the new version of events because he is a friend of Gallagher's. When asked about his opinion of his former superior, Scott responded saying he likes him "and that he didn't want him to go away for the rest of his life," Walsh reported.

Suffer Well.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [Guffaw] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Guffaw wrote:
TheStroBro wrote:
Every President seems to pardon pieces of shit.


Yes. People who did committed crimes but had (misguided) good intentions (eco-terrorists or social justice warriors who didn't hurt anyone). People who committed non violent crimes and have a sympathetic story. People who belong to 'upper society' and did rich people crimes - i.e. insider trading, embezzling

But people who use a military action as an excuse to get off on murdering civilians, including women and children? People who execute and tortured prisoners? That this is real war crimes stuff right there. And by minimizing it with a simple 'murder charge', or worse, pardoning, it makes the US Military look like a force for evil. The bad guy.

No, there are presidents, to include the last one that pardoned assholes.

Washed up footy player turned Triathlete.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [Guffaw] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Guffaw wrote:
TheStroBro wrote:
Every President seems to pardon pieces of shit.


Yes. People who did committed crimes but had (misguided) good intentions (eco-terrorists or social justice warriors who didn't hurt anyone). People who committed non violent crimes and have a sympathetic story. People who belong to 'upper society' and did rich people crimes - i.e. insider trading, embezzling

But people who use a military action as an excuse to get off on murdering civilians, including women and children? People who execute and tortured prisoners? That this is real war crimes stuff right there. And by minimizing it with a simple 'murder charge', or worse, pardoning, it makes the US Military look like a force for evil. The bad guy.


You realize of course that the trial continues for SEAL Gallagher? And that the evidence against him is rather thin? Or are you ready to convict him based on media accounts right now? I don’t really understand this desire to just assume that Gallagher is guilty and then proceed from there. Hey, maybe he is and maybe he isn’t, but from everything I’ve read, there is no smoking gun and there is a lot of conflicting testimony, not to mention witnesses who got together ahead of time to make sure that their stories lined up.

ETA: It’s pretty apparent from this thread that you’ve determined that Gallagher is guilty, period. You don’t seem particularly concerned whether or not a trial actually finds him guilty or not; you’ve read enough media reports to make your mind up. And we all know how accurate the media is on these things.

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Last edited by: spot: Jun 21, 19 17:16
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [spot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
spot wrote:
Guffaw wrote:
TheStroBro wrote:
Every President seems to pardon pieces of shit.

Yes. People who did committed crimes but had (misguided) good intentions (eco-terrorists or social justice warriors who didn't hurt anyone). People who committed non violent crimes and have a sympathetic story. People who belong to 'upper society' and did rich people crimes - i.e. insider trading, embezzling

But people who use a military action as an excuse to get off on murdering civilians, including women and children? People who execute and tortured prisoners? That this is real war crimes stuff right there. And by minimizing it with a simple 'murder charge', or worse, pardoning, it makes the US Military look like a force for evil. The bad guy.

You realize of course that the trial continues for SEAL Gallagher? And that the evidence against him is rather thin? Or are you ready to convict him based on media accounts right now? I don’t really understand this desire to just assume that Gallagher is guilty and then proceed from there. Hey, maybe he is and maybe he isn’t, but from everything I’ve read, there is no smoking gun and there is a lot of conflicting testimony, not to mention witnesses who got together ahead of time to make sure that their stories lined up.

You mean like a medic admitting to the killing?
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
windywave wrote:
spot wrote:
Guffaw wrote:
TheStroBro wrote:
Every President seems to pardon pieces of shit.

Yes. People who did committed crimes but had (misguided) good intentions (eco-terrorists or social justice warriors who didn't hurt anyone). People who committed non violent crimes and have a sympathetic story. People who belong to 'upper society' and did rich people crimes - i.e. insider trading, embezzling

But people who use a military action as an excuse to get off on murdering civilians, including women and children? People who execute and tortured prisoners? That this is real war crimes stuff right there. And by minimizing it with a simple 'murder charge', or worse, pardoning, it makes the US Military look like a force for evil. The bad guy.

You realize of course that the trial continues for SEAL Gallagher? And that the evidence against him is rather thin? Or are you ready to convict him based on media accounts right now? I don’t really understand this desire to just assume that Gallagher is guilty and then proceed from there. Hey, maybe he is and maybe he isn’t, but from everything I’ve read, there is no smoking gun and there is a lot of conflicting testimony, not to mention witnesses who got together ahead of time to make sure that their stories lined up.

You mean like a medic admitting to the killing?

There are multiple different accounts of what happened. There is also evidence of witnesses texting each other to get their story straight. I honestly have no idea what the truth is at this point. Maybe Gallagher is absolutely guilty of everything he is accused of, but whose testimony do you trust in this case?

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [spot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
There is also evidence of witnesses texting each other to get their story straight. //

I believe it is called circling the wagons?? Someone mentioned earlier that the confession was from someone that has immunity? Is that really the case if you lied to get that immunity? I mean, if that guy told them he was going to admit to the murder, no way he gets immunity, is that right??
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [monty] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
monty wrote:
There is also evidence of witnesses texting each other to get their story straight. //

I believe it is called circling the wagons?? Someone mentioned earlier that the confession was from someone that has immunity? Is that really the case if you lied to get that immunity? I mean, if that guy told them he was going to admit to the murder, no way he gets immunity, is that right??

All good questions. This whole case is bewildering to me. There is a lot of hearsay, and there are many different accounts as to what happened to the ISIS captive. Not to mention that there are photos of the ISIS captive and there are no apparent knife wounds on him. There is zero physical evidence. Now...all that being said....how likely is that SEALs would turn on one of their own if at least some of this wasn’t true? I think the prosecution is banking on that. But this whole thing is just really weird to me. And, one more time for the record...I am not and never was for a pardon for this guy. The trial should go forward.

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [spot] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
You a correct. We should wait for the alternative facts to come to light.

Remember - It's important to be comfortable in your own skin... because it turns out society frowns on wearing other people's
Quote Reply
Re: The pardons that shouldn't [Guffaw] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Guffaw wrote:
You a correct. We should wait for the alternative facts to come to light.

Seriously, that’s the best retort you have? Weak dude, very weak. You’ve decided this guy is guilty from the get-go, without even apparently reading a report you yourself linked. My guess is that you are pre-disposed to assuming the worst of the US military, that much seems relatively clear from your posts on this subject.

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.
Quote Reply

Prev Next