Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I trust the hearing's commanding officer and his release of his recommendations. Right now, that's the only official release, and it came straight from the Article 32 hearing.
You don't know squat, Arjay. No one does until, or if, a full report is released.
Explain how Bergdahl is innocent since he did desert regardless of how you parse any partial statement that you cherry pick to support yourself. Explain how he should not be punished according to military law. Explain how anything you disagree with has no value and is a personal attack. Explain to us how the military is not influenced by Obama and does exactly what he wants, by their own regulations.
I too have gone through your posts and seen nothing condemning this cowardice displayed. Even the eyewitness testimony of his direct superiors and squad mates is dismissed. Explain how his stated excuse of his superiors incompetence has come true by his actions.
Then we can talk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjay51
Do you trust all defense lawyers to admit to the truth about their clients? If so, I pity you.
Just one deflection and misinterpretation after another.
Again, I posted the link to the full transcript. That is the only testimony that matters at this point.
I trust the hearing's commanding officer and his release of his recommendations. Right now, that's the only official release, and it came straight from the Article 32 hearing.
You don't know squat, Arjay. No one does until, or if, a full report is released.
Would that include you? And it covers both charges?
Waiting for the full report and then the investigation of those who interviewed Bergdahl and the release of the actual tapes of what was said.
An addendum to my response to this post. I doubt very seriously that you have read 400 pages in the few days since it was released. Since you have lied about so many things in this thread I suspect that if you read any of it, you stopped when you came across some portion that on the face of it supported your unfounded claims.
So you admit that your defense could (and should) change at the final outcome. Nice of you to admit that you could be wrong.
Again you've misinterpreted what I've posted.
I never defended Bergdahl. I defended the process by which it will be determined what his crime actually was.
I've never seen any point in wringing my hands over what other people think he did or didn't do.
As I've repeatedly said, the only testimony that matters is that which was given at the hearing and, if is it so decided, further court martial.
For whatever reason, because I posted links and quotes from the actual testimony that happened to contradict that which has been bandied about in the media since he stepped off the plane, you chose to view that as my defending his actions is some fashion.
A reasonable person would understand that all I did was present the facts as they are now known.
Facts are not positive or negative. They just are.
I never defended Bergdahl. I defended the process by which it will be determined what his crime actually was.
I've never seen any point in wringing my hands over what other people think he did or didn't do.
As I've repeatedly said, the only testimony that matters is that which was given at the hearing and, if is it so decided, further court martial.
For whatever reason, because I posted links and quotes from the actual testimony that happened to contradict that which has been bandied about in the media since he stepped off the plane, you chose to view that as my defending his actions is some fashion.
A reasonable person would understand that all I did was present the facts as they are now known.
Facts are not positive or negative. They just are.
Well, if the only testimony that matters is that which was given at the hearing as you claimed,
Then, why
Maj. Gen. Kenneth Dahl testified Friday Bergdahl was "unrealistically idealistic" when he left his remote outpost some six years ago, hoping to draw attention to what he considered poor leadership of his unit.
Well, if the only testimony that matters is that which was given at the hearing as you claimed,
Then, why
Maj. Gen. Kenneth Dahl testified Friday Bergdahl was "unrealistically idealistic" when he left his remote outpost some six years ago, hoping to draw attention to what he considered poor leadership of his unit.
I never defended Bergdahl. I defended the process by which it will be determined what his crime actually was.
I've never seen any point in wringing my hands over what other people think he did or didn't do.
As I've repeatedly said, the only testimony that matters is that which was given at the hearing and, if is it so decided, further court martial.
For whatever reason, because I posted links and quotes from the actual testimony that happened to contradict that which has been bandied about in the media since he stepped off the plane, you chose to view that as my defending his actions is some fashion.
A reasonable person would understand that all I did was present the facts as they are now known.
Facts are not positive or negative. They just are.
As long as you post items from both sides, yes. You cite only those that support Bergdahl and claim them as acceptable. A bit of bias there, but you will never admit it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
