I’m sure that note would be an excellent piece of evidence in a trial.
As the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has noted, if there was misconduct, he will be held accountable. But his words: “the questions about this particular soldier’s conduct are separate from our effort to recover ANY U.S. service member in enemy captivity”.
What’s your point here? None of this disputes anything I or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs has said.
I found this a bit odd:http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?235698-Obama-considering-hostage-trade-for-Pvt-Bergdahl&
Obama considering hostage trade for Pvt Bergdahl found on another fourm dated 2-18-2014
Point? The point is one is tried in a court room and the other side goes free.
You are not the only person asking such rhetorical questions.
In today’s NY Times there’s an article which addresses this (and related) allegations. Two quotations from the article seem to capture the essence of the accusations:
In other words, allegations, smearing, maybe even ‘Swiftboating’.
ETA: This is the same NYT article that Xema linked to.
This has nothing to do with any point of mine.
That’s pretty uncalled for. Why would you insinuate iiadyiii’s military service record is in anyway blemished?
Edit: removed the “have you stopped beating you wife” …didn’t see to fit the discussion
post #92
Lets start another thread when that point in time comes … point 
Sure. I think we’ll agree, though – I have no problem with him being tried if the evidence supports, and if he committed a crime, then he should be held accountable.
Yes and we also elect members of Congress and the law which the President signed states he must alert them.
Yes but he gets to do things within the subscribed boundaries of the laws passed. “I was in a hurry” doesn’t really ring true considering it had to be coordinated with Qatar along with negotiating with terrorist’s. Was there a Memorial Day special on hostages that expired? His staff couldn’t pick up the phone because…?
Getting him home is one thing. Lying on national TV that he “served with honor and distinction” is another.
So war isn’t black and white?
It’s not fair? Justice isn’t always handed down at the end of the day?
War often times leads us into uncomfortable conclusions?
Color me shocked.
This kinda makes the administration’s reason for breaking the law (“no time to inform Congress”) a lie, doesn’t it? Plenty of time from Feb. 18 until now.
At the very least, there was time when he did. Beyond that, you don’t know the relevant facts, and don’t pretend you do.
I agree that Susan Rice shouldn’t have said this.
Yes, but the main reason she shouldn’t have said it is that it gives the hyenas some fresh meat to gnaw on.
Yep. I look forward to Sunday shows and Congressional hearings coming soon. Why, Graham and McCain probably had to ‘retire’ to the men’s room as soon as they heard Rice say it.
well the accusations are supposed to be based on a written document left behind by Bergdahl. Maybe he forgot to get it notarized.
If so, that will be a good piece of evidence for a trial if the overall evidence warrants.
It happened 5 years ago. They knew 5 years ago he left a note and walked away. The main reason she should NOT have said it is that it’s not a characterization of what’s transpired.
According to the Taliban in 2010 Bergdahl was busy teaching them how to dismantle a mobile phone and turn it into a remote control for a roadside bomb. That’s called aiding and abetting the enemy. Again, this isn’t new information unless they don’t get the internet at the WH. Maybe it’s part of the phone problem they’re having with Congress.
Note the picture of him dressed like Castro sent by the Taliban isn’t the one shown on TV. That’s a media marker. When the less-than-flattering pictures show up then you’ll know the wind has shifted.