Obama knew the truth about Bergdahl !

[The Professor]

The biggest question of all is this: Did Obama know that Bergdahl just walked away from his post? The answer seems to be: Yes.

“A Pentagon investigation established in 2010 that on that Tuesday, Bergdahl abandoned his platoon in a war zone near the Pakistan border while serving with the 1st Battalion, 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division.”

'He should face a court-martial for desertion!': Two former Bowe Bergdahl platoon-mates say he put 'thousands' in danger when he abandoned his Army post | Mail Online

“The Pentagon concluded in 2010 that Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl walked away from his unit, and after an initial flurry of searching the military curbed any high-risk rescue plans. But the U.S. kept pursuing avenues to negotiate his release, recently seeking to fracture the Taliban network by making its leaders fear a faster deal with underlings could prevent the freedom they sought for five of their top officials, American officials told The Associated Press.”

Questions loom over Bergdahl-Taliban swap - The Washington Post

“A Pentagon investigation concluded in 2010 that Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl walked away from his unit, and after an initial flurry of searching the military decided not to exert extraordinary efforts to rescue him, according to a former senior defense official who was involved in the matter. Instead, the U.S. government pursued negotiations to get him back over the following five years of his captivity — a track that led to his release over the weekend.”

U.S. concluded in 2010 that Bergdahl walked away

So in order to secure the release of a known deserter Obama freed five of the most dangerous men on the planet. God help us all.

 

[williepete]

So in order to secure the release of a known deserter Obama freed five of the most dangerous men on the planet.

Let that sink in good and hard. When they kill Americans or Allies again, remember.

 

[Zander]

Obama is a foreign policy disaster.....worse than that feckless pansy Carter....shockingly lame.

 

[tinydancer]

I was just reading that the Pentagon concluded Bowe walked away. Can some one email Susan Rice to tell her that he didn't serve with dignity?

I've got a link for her at Yahoo news. These people who are in charge of the country really should start using google to find out what's really going on.

U.S. concluded in 2010 that Bergdahl walked away

 

[Katzndogz]

obama needs to go. Enough is enough. This on top of the VA on top of Benghazi. obama is. engaging in outright warfare against our own military.

 

[williepete]

Remember this jewel from 2010?:

Taliban claim captured U.S. solider has converted to Islam and is teaching its fighters bomb-making skills

A captured American soldier is training Taliban fighters bomb-making and ambush skills, according to one of his captors and Afghan intelligence officials.

Private Bowe Bergdahl disappeared in June 2009 while based in eastern Afghanistan and is thought to be the only U.S. serviceman in captivity.

The 24-year-old has converted to Islam and now has the Muslim name Abdullah, one of his captors told The Sunday Times

Read more: Bowe Bergdahl: Taliban claim captured U.S. solider is teaching fighters bomb-making skills | Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

So in order to secure the release of a known deserter Obama freed five of the most dangerous men on the planet. God help us all.

This is unfounded, hyperbolic nonsense.

Allegations that Bergdahl is a ‘deserter’ have no bearing whatsoever on the merits or conditions of his release; indeed, it is not ‘known’ that Bergdahl is a ‘deserter,’ as neither an investigation has been conducted nor has Bergdahl been afforded due process or found guilty of any crime.

In essence you’re making the inane and failed ‘argument’ that Bergdahl should be presumed guilty of the allegations and summarily ‘punished’ by being left behind with his captors.

In fact, it was incumbent upon the president to secure Bergdahl’s release pursuant to an investigation and court martial if warranted.

And the same is true of the five released detainees, who have not been afforded due process, have not been afforded a trial, and have not been found guilty of any crimes.

Indeed, the release of the detainees comports with the law because these five individuals were being held absent a conviction of any crime, which goes to the overall un-Constitutional failure what was the process and policy of holding terrorist suspects in custody absent due process of the law. See, e.g., Boumediene v. Bush (2008).

If Bergdahl is guilty of any crimes, that will be determined in due course in accordance with the law, a determination that could not have been made if he had been left behind. And if Bergdahl is not guilty of committing any crimes, to have left him behind as a prisoner predicated solely on unproven allegations would have been the actual crime.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Now who is it going into "full blown partisan brain dead mode" again? Clayton? Nice how you copy pasted that response into my thread as well.

 

[TemplarKormac]

This is unfounded, hyperbolic nonsense.

Sure that's what you say about everything.

Allegations that Bergdahl is a ‘deserter’ have no bearing whatsoever on the merits or conditions of his release; indeed, it is not ‘known’ that Bergdahl is a ‘deserter,’ as neither an investigation has been conducted nor has Bergdahl been afforded due process or found guilty of any crime.

There is proof. You have Cody Full and Gerald Sutton, platoon mates of Bergdahl's telling Fox News that he deserted. The Intelligence Community was well aware he deserted. Did you even read the thread?

In essence you’re making the inane and failed ‘argument’ that Bergdahl should be presumed guilty of the allegations and summarily ‘punished’ by being left behind with his captors.

Well, if the shoe fits. Multiple witnesses, 5 years of intel and reconnaissance. This will be an open and shut case, Clayton.

In fact, it was incumbent upon the president to secure Bergdahl’s release pursuant to an investigation and court martial if warranted.

That is a cop-out. Until he was found to have been a traitor, you (perhaps not you if I recall) were hailing his release as an example that Obama cares about his men. Lo and behold, a slew of witnesses and evidence come out indicating the man deserted his post and aided the enemy. He violated Article 85 and 86 of the UCMJ.

And the same is true of the five released detainees, who have not been afforded due process, have not been afforded a trial, and have not been found guilty of any crimes.

They're terrorists. They are not afforded due process rights under the US Constitution. The 14th Amendment specifically calls for citizens of the US to be granted due process under the law. Do these 5 terrorists look like citizens to you? 70 years of precedent says that enemy combatants have no habeas corpus rights.

Indeed, the release of the detainees comports with the law because these five individuals were being held absent a conviction of any crime, which goes to the overall un-Constitutional failure what was the process and policy of holding terrorist suspects in custody absent due process of the law. See, e.g., Boumediene v. Bush (2008).

Perhaps you were unaware of this one

Johnson v. Eisentrager, 339 U.S. 763 (1950)

If Bergdahl is guilty of any crimes, that will be determined in due course in accordance with the law, a determination that could not have been made if he had been left behind. And if Bergdahl is not guilty of committing any crimes, to have left him behind as a prisoner predicated solely on unproven allegations would have been the actual crime.

He will be tried and prosecuted under the UCMJ.

 

[CaféAuLait]

The biggest question of all is this: Did Obama know that Bergdahl just walked away from his post? The answer seems to be: Yes.

“A Pentagon investigation established in 2010 that on that Tuesday, Bergdahl abandoned his platoon in a war zone near the Pakistan border while serving with the 1st Battalion, 501st Parachute Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division.”

'He should face a court-martial for desertion!': Two former Bowe Bergdahl platoon-mates say he put 'thousands' in danger when he abandoned his Army post | Mail Online

“The Pentagon concluded in 2010 that Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl walked away from his unit, and after an initial flurry of searching the military curbed any high-risk rescue plans. But the U.S. kept pursuing avenues to negotiate his release, recently seeking to fracture the Taliban network by making its leaders fear a faster deal with underlings could prevent the freedom they sought for five of their top officials, American officials told The Associated Press.”

Questions loom over Bergdahl-Taliban swap - The Washington Post

“A Pentagon investigation concluded in 2010 that Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl walked away from his unit, and after an initial flurry of searching the military decided not to exert extraordinary efforts to rescue him, according to a former senior defense official who was involved in the matter. Instead, the U.S. government pursued negotiations to get him back over the following five years of his captivity — a track that led to his release over the weekend.”

U.S. concluded in 2010 that Bergdahl walked away

So in order to secure the release of a known deserter Obama freed five of the most dangerous men on the planet. God help us all.

I'm going with my conspiracy theory. He was found and rescued by SF and then Obama decided to release the Taliban 5, he has been wanting to release since 2011.

How the hell would we know his health was deteriorating? If we were that close to know he was so ill, why didn't we rescue him prior? Not to mention given Obama wanted to trade him 3 years ago for the same terrorists why didn't he? What changed?

Taliban five - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[TemplarKormac]

“The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it”.

The US Constitution, Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2.

So, if you are a terrorist actively seeking to attack the US mainland, you are attempting an invasion. Thusly, your writ of habeas corpus does not apply A) because you are not a citizen, as Eisentrager correctly states and B) it would be suspended because you meet the circumstances specified in the Suspension Clause.

 

[Clementine]

The more that comes out about this, the worse Obama looks. Something is very wrong with this picture.

 

[Politico]

Of course he did. Everyone did. It was reported that way on day one.

Now who is it going into "full blown partisan brain dead mode" again? Clayton? Nice how you copy pasted that response into my thread as well.

That's how he rolls.

 

[earlycuyler]

hi

So in order to secure the release of a known deserter Obama freed five of the most dangerous men on the planet. God help us all.

This is unfounded, hyperbolic nonsense.

Allegations that Bergdahl is a ‘deserter’ have no bearing whatsoever on the merits or conditions of his release; indeed, it is not ‘known’ that Bergdahl is a ‘deserter,’ as neither an investigation has been conducted nor has Bergdahl been afforded due process or found guilty of any crime.

In essence you’re making the inane and failed ‘argument’ that Bergdahl should be presumed guilty of the allegations and summarily ‘punished’ by being left behind with his captors.

In fact, it was incumbent upon the president to secure Bergdahl’s release pursuant to an investigation and court martial if warranted.

And the same is true of the five released detainees, who have not been afforded due process, have not been afforded a trial, and have not been found guilty of any crimes.

Indeed, the release of the detainees comports with the law because these five individuals were being held absent a conviction of any crime, which goes to the overall un-Constitutional failure what was the process and policy of holding terrorist suspects in custody absent due process of the law. See, e.g., Boumediene v. Bush (2008).

If Bergdahl is guilty of any crimes, that will be determined in due course in accordance with the law, a determination that could not have been made if he had been left behind. And if Bergdahl is not guilty of committing any crimes, to have left him behind as a prisoner predicated solely on unproven allegations would have been the actual crime.

Legalistic B.S. as usuel. All meaningless for the very reasons you point out, that no one knows anything because no investigation has been done, and likely wont. The one thing that makes this smell odd is this, why did they not behead him, set him on fire and drag him down the street? and there was someone who immediately refuted the story that comes with this "P.O.W." . More and more this is looking like a political stunt nothing more.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Oh, lets not forget that Bergdahl may have violated Article 104 of the UCMJ as well.

 

[CaféAuLait]

hi

So in order to secure the release of a known deserter Obama freed five of the most dangerous men on the planet. God help us all.

This is unfounded, hyperbolic nonsense.

Allegations that Bergdahl is a ‘deserter’ have no bearing whatsoever on the merits or conditions of his release; indeed, it is not ‘known’ that Bergdahl is a ‘deserter,’ as neither an investigation has been conducted nor has Bergdahl been afforded due process or found guilty of any crime.

In essence you’re making the inane and failed ‘argument’ that Bergdahl should be presumed guilty of the allegations and summarily ‘punished’ by being left behind with his captors.

In fact, it was incumbent upon the president to secure Bergdahl’s release pursuant to an investigation and court martial if warranted.

And the same is true of the five released detainees, who have not been afforded due process, have not been afforded a trial, and have not been found guilty of any crimes.

Indeed, the release of the detainees comports with the law because these five individuals were being held absent a conviction of any crime, which goes to the overall un-Constitutional failure what was the process and policy of holding terrorist suspects in custody absent due process of the law. See, e.g., Boumediene v. Bush (2008).

If Bergdahl is guilty of any crimes, that will be determined in due course in accordance with the law, a determination that could not have been made if he had been left behind. And if Bergdahl is not guilty of committing any crimes, to have left him behind as a prisoner predicated solely on unproven allegations would have been the actual crime.

Legalistic B.S. as usuel. All meaningless for the very reasons you point out, that no one knows anything because no investigation has been done, and likely wont. The one thing that makes this smell odd is this, why did they not behead him, set him on fire and drag him down the street? and there was someone who immediately refuted the story that comes with this "P.O.W." . More and more this is looking like a political stunt nothing more.

I'm sure CID investigated as soon as he walked away. They just don't let soldiers walk away from their FOB. Not to mention there are many stories where it states it was investigated and it found he walked away. Not to mention the intercepted radio transmissions from the Taliban and their claims he was making bombs for them.


U.S. concluded in 2010 that Bergdahl walked away

Heck he sent all his uniforms and stuff home before leaving. He went AWOL and was pissed he was refused entrance into the French Foreign Legion right before joining the ARMY.

 

[earlycuyler]

hi

This is unfounded, hyperbolic nonsense.

Allegations that Bergdahl is a ‘deserter’ have no bearing whatsoever on the merits or conditions of his release; indeed, it is not ‘known’ that Bergdahl is a ‘deserter,’ as neither an investigation has been conducted nor has Bergdahl been afforded due process or found guilty of any crime.

In essence you’re making the inane and failed ‘argument’ that Bergdahl should be presumed guilty of the allegations and summarily ‘punished’ by being left behind with his captors.

In fact, it was incumbent upon the president to secure Bergdahl’s release pursuant to an investigation and court martial if warranted.

And the same is true of the five released detainees, who have not been afforded due process, have not been afforded a trial, and have not been found guilty of any crimes.

Indeed, the release of the detainees comports with the law because these five individuals were being held absent a conviction of any crime, which goes to the overall un-Constitutional failure what was the process and policy of holding terrorist suspects in custody absent due process of the law. See, e.g., Boumediene v. Bush (2008).

If Bergdahl is guilty of any crimes, that will be determined in due course in accordance with the law, a determination that could not have been made if he had been left behind. And if Bergdahl is not guilty of committing any crimes, to have left him behind as a prisoner predicated solely on unproven allegations would have been the actual crime.

Legalistic B.S. as usuel. All meaningless for the very reasons you point out, that no one knows anything because no investigation has been done, and likely wont. The one thing that makes this smell odd is this, why did they not behead him, set him on fire and drag him down the street? and there was someone who immediately refuted the story that comes with this "P.O.W." . More and more this is looking like a political stunt nothing more.

I'm sure CID investigated as soon as he walked away. They just don't let soldiers walk away from their FOB. Not to mention there are many stories where it states it was investigated and it found he walked away. Not to mention the intercepted radio transmissions from the Taliban and their claims he was making bombs for them.


U.S. concluded in 2010 that Bergdahl walked away

Heck he sent all his uniforms and stuff home before leaving. He went AWOL and was pissed he was refused entrance into the French Foreign Legion right before joining the ARMY.

Its all to weird. If something was going to stick to this president and undo him this one may be it. One thing is for sure, when the next car bomb gos off in an embassy over seas Obama will be 100% responcible. That blood will be on his hands. Wonder if he will eat pizza and go to bed?

 

[Esmeralda]

Remember this jewel from 2010?:

Taliban claim captured U.S. solider has converted to Islam and is teaching its fighters bomb-making skills

A captured American soldier is training Taliban fighters bomb-making and ambush skills, according to one of his captors and Afghan intelligence officials.

Private Bowe Bergdahl disappeared in June 2009 while based in eastern Afghanistan and is thought to be the only U.S. serviceman in captivity.

The 24-year-old has converted to Islam and now has the Muslim name Abdullah, one of his captors told The Sunday Times

Read more: Bowe Bergdahl: Taliban claim captured U.S. solider is teaching fighters bomb-making skills | Mail Online
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

You don't think this is probably propaganda?

 

[The Professor]

Let's not forget how Bergdahl condemned the US involvement in Afghanistan in an email to his parents just three days before he went missing. The following are direct quotes from the New York Post:

“I am sorry for everything here,” he wrote. “These people need help, yet what they get is the most conceited country in the world telling them that they are nothing and that they are stupid.”

Bergdahl also complained about fellow soldiers. The battalion commander was a “conceited old fool,” he said, and the only “decent” sergeants, planning to leave the platoon “as soon as they can,” told the privates — Bergdahl then among them — “to do the same.”

“I am ashamed to be an American. And the title of US soldier is just the lie of fools,” he concluded. “I am sorry for everything. The horror that is America is disgusting.”

The bizarre tale of America?s last known POW | New York Post

 

[williepete]

Concerning The Mail 2010 report from the UK:

You don't think this is probably propaganda?

I guess it's always prudent to question a news story.

As due diligence of an established news organization like The Mail, the Editor had to make very sure of what he/she was printing before jeopardizing the credibility of their paper. It's normal to have more than one source to support a story. Not sure why you would think it might be propaganda but The Mail was willing to go with the story. In considering your question, I wonder what propaganda agenda The Mail would have had back in 2010. To publish propaganda dressed up like a news story would be hazardous to their business. They trusted their reporters and sources and went with the story.

If you still dismiss the credibility of this news source, you can email their foreign desk and ask them:
Home | Mail Online