Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Ouze wrote:
I think Wikileaks are heroes again now that they dumped all those DNC emails.

Thr did?

I've not here much big after the peak of all those files they got given. Bar maybe some election emails and such, what have they done?

Also Assange is still in his hiding place, but he might have said too much and risked his position.

The new president is less friendly to him, and he might need to think what he says.

 jhe90 wrote:
Also Assange is still in his hiding place, but he might have said too much and risked his position.

Or he sexually assaulted a few women. That might be part of it.

 Ahtman wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:
Also Assange is still in his hiding place, but he might have said too much and risked his position.

Or he sexually assaulted a few women. That might be part of it.

Not to detail but he made statements thr president disagreed with on Catalonia. Said things, new president is less sympathetic.

He could lose asylum.

Don, t wanna get it closed so a maybe leave it there.

Berghdal told the judge he knew what he did was illegal and he did it anyway. So sentencing will probably reflect that as well.

 redleger wrote:
Berghdal told the judge he knew what he did was illegal and he did it anyway. So sentencing will probably reflect that as well.

Is there actually any soldier who DOESN'T know desertion is illegal? It would seem like a very crucial thing to tell them so they don't just wander off when bored (or scared).

Spetulhu wrote:

 redleger wrote:
Berghdal told the judge he knew what he did was illegal and he did it anyway. So sentencing will probably reflect that as well.

Is there actually any soldier who DOESN'T know desertion is illegal? It would seem like a very crucial thing to tell them so they don't just wander off when bored (or scared).

And deserting in a war zone too. A active war zone on current oporations.

It's not like he absconded and went back to Kansa, or decided I quit and walked out the Base and went to the local motel for a few days.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/10/23/559506986/bowe-bergdahls-sentencing-hearing-examines-trump-s-comments

In previous filings, lawyers for Bergdahl cited at least 45 instances where Trump called their client a traitor. In Monday's discussion, the defense emphasized comments from Trump the same day Bergdahl pleaded guilty to desertion and misbehavior before the enemy.

"I can't comment on Bowe Bergdahl," Trump told reporters last Monday. "But I think people have heard my comments in the past."

So we went from “this is what will happen when I’m president” vs “I’m the president, this is what will happen” to “I’m not saying it, but this is what I said”?

 d-usa wrote:
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/10/23/559506986/bowe-bergdahls-sentencing-hearing-examines-trump-s-comments

In previous filings, lawyers for Bergdahl cited at least 45 instances where Trump called their client a traitor. In Monday's discussion, the defense emphasized comments from Trump the same day Bergdahl pleaded guilty to desertion and misbehavior before the enemy.

"I can't comment on Bowe Bergdahl," Trump told reporters last Monday. "But I think people have heard my comments in the past."

So we went from “this is what will happen when I’m president” vs “I’m the president, this is what will happen” to “I’m not saying it, but this is what I said”?

I assume this change is due to advisers knocking him metaphorically over the head again and again telling him to quit saying dumb gak.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spetulhu wrote:

 redleger wrote:
Berghdal told the judge he knew what he did was illegal and he did it anyway. So sentencing will probably reflect that as well.

Is there actually any soldier who DOESN'T know desertion is illegal? It would seem like a very crucial thing to tell them so they don't just wander off when bored (or scared).

Yes we all know its illegal, its second week basic training classes discussing the law of war and UCMJ. The point I was making was regardless of undue influence defence he tried to make, he admitted to willfully and unlawfully doing exactly what he was charged with even though he understood the consequences. So all those thinking he deserves to be let off with a slap on the wrist and do not care about the lives he caused to be lost may not get what they want.

 redleger wrote:

Spetulhu wrote:
Is there actually any soldier who DOESN'T know desertion is illegal?

Yes we all know its illegal, its second week basic training classes discussing the law of war and UCMJ. The point I was making was regardless of undue influence defence he tried to make, he admitted to willfully and unlawfully doing exactly what he was charged with even though he understood the consequences.

Aye. Just thought it would be rather pointless for him to claim he didn't know, so admitting he knew what he did was wrong is simply basic honesty unlikely to affect the outcome of the case.

 redleger wrote:

Spetulhu wrote:

 redleger wrote:
Berghdal told the judge he knew what he did was illegal and he did it anyway. So sentencing will probably reflect that as well.

Is there actually any soldier who DOESN'T know desertion is illegal? It would seem like a very crucial thing to tell them so they don't just wander off when bored (or scared).

Yes we all know its illegal, its second week basic training classes discussing the law of war and UCMJ. The point I was making was regardless of undue influence defence he tried to make, he admitted to willfully and unlawfully doing exactly what he was charged with even though he understood the consequences. So all those thinking he deserves to be let off with a slap on the wrist and do not care about the lives he caused to be lost may not get what they want.

To be fair, you can't really be 100% definitive about "the lives he caused to be lost" without proving that operations where the lives were lost were specifically intended to be rescue missions for Bergdahl.

I think that's an important distinction to be made:
Were lives lost specifically while searching for him or were people just trying to say that because someone pointed out "Oh yeah and be on the lookout for info about Bergdahl" it suddenly became a search & rescue mission?

To quote the Secretary of Defense before Congress:

"I have personally gone back and asked that question inside the Pentagon, in the Army, in all of our reports. I have seen no evidence that directly links any American combat death to the rescue or finding or search of Sergeant Bergdahl. And I have asked the question. We have all asked the question. I have seen no evidence, no facts presented to me when I asked that question."

 d-usa wrote:
To quote the Secretary of Defense before Congress:

"I have personally gone back and asked that question inside the Pentagon, in the Army, in all of our reports. I have seen no evidence that directly links any American combat death to the rescue or finding or search of Sergeant Bergdahl. And I have asked the question. We have all asked the question. I have seen no evidence, no facts presented to me when I asked that question."

I think we all understand this. There were soldiers, however, permanently seriously crippled in actions related specifically to missions whose purpose was to find Bergdahl. They will or have already testified before the judge in the case.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 redleger wrote:

Spetulhu wrote:

 redleger wrote:
Berghdal told the judge he knew what he did was illegal and he did it anyway. So sentencing will probably reflect that as well.

Is there actually any soldier who DOESN'T know desertion is illegal? It would seem like a very crucial thing to tell them so they don't just wander off when bored (or scared).

Yes we all know its illegal, its second week basic training classes discussing the law of war and UCMJ. The point I was making was regardless of undue influence defence he tried to make, he admitted to willfully and unlawfully doing exactly what he was charged with even though he understood the consequences. So all those thinking he deserves to be let off with a slap on the wrist and do not care about the lives he caused to be lost may not get what they want.

To be fair, you can't really be 100% definitive about "the lives he caused to be lost" without proving that operations where the lives were lost were specifically intended to be rescue missions for Bergdahl.

I think that's an important distinction to be made:
Were lives lost specifically while searching for him or were people just trying to say that because someone pointed out "Oh yeah and be on the lookout for info about Bergdahl" it suddenly became a search & rescue mission?

Not true. Lives could have been lost/or troopers wounded on ops not related to Bergdahl because ISR and other support assets were dedicated to the search which otherwise would have been available to their units. His search got priority for a lot of assets that would otherwise have been used for other missions.

If he is found as anything other then mentally ill this is just sad.

He was ovbiously mentally ill at the time, no one just wonders off into an enemy city unarmed with no money or anything. Just wondering through the town for fun during a open conflict.

If this shows anything it is the lack of people being aware of the mental health of soldiers.

 redleger wrote:
Yes we all know its illegal, its second week basic training classes discussing the law of war and UCMJ. The point I was making was regardless of undue influence defence he tried to make, he admitted to willfully and unlawfully doing exactly what he was charged with even though he understood the consequences. So all those thinking he deserves to be let off with a slap on the wrist and do not care about the lives he caused to be lost may not get what they want.

I was one of the people who originally was saying that no one knows for sure what the situation was when he first disappeared. There were rumors that he has deserted but at the time it was far from clear what had actually happened. Now that a better picture has emerged, then I don't see any problem with him prosecuted and sentenced appropriately, with the fact he was tortured for as long as he was as a mitigating factor when he's sentenced. I have no idea what an appropriate sentence would be so won't speculate on that.

The only reason that I mentioned the undue command influence is that there sure were a lot of of people on this very forum who popped monocles and called for their fainting couches when the former president said, essentially, "people who commit crimes should be prosecuted", but now a few years later wouldn't say gak if they had a mouthful when the current president specifically names a suspect and says he should be shot, he should be pushed out of an airplane without a parachute, and so on, and so forth, over and over again.

However I realize how very stupid I was to think I had a good point because there has been overwhelming evidence over the last few months that integrity and intellectual honestly have taken a far, far distant back seat to rooting for the red team despite the fact it now has the worst imaginable quarterback. So, more the fool was I.

 Ouze wrote:

 redleger wrote:
Yes we all know its illegal, its second week basic training classes discussing the law of war and UCMJ. The point I was making was regardless of undue influence defence he tried to make, he admitted to willfully and unlawfully doing exactly what he was charged with even though he understood the consequences. So all those thinking he deserves to be let off with a slap on the wrist and do not care about the lives he caused to be lost may not get what they want.

I was one of the people who originally was saying that no one knows for sure what the situation was when he first disappeared. There were rumors that he has deserted but at the time it was far from clear what had actually happened. Now that a better picture has emerged, then I don't see any problem with him prosecuted and sentenced appropriately, with the fact he was tortured for as long as he was as a mitigating factor when he's sentenced. I have no idea what an appropriate sentence would be so won't speculate on that.

The only reason that I mentioned the undue command influence is that there sure were a lot of of people on this very forum who popped monocles and called for their fainting couches when the former president said, essentially, "people who commit crimes should be prosecuted", but now a few years later wouldn't say gak if they had a mouthful when the current president specifically names a suspect and says he should be shot, he should be pushed out of an airplane without a parachute, and so on, and so forth, over and over again.

However I realize how very stupid I was to think I had a good point because there has been overwhelming evidence over the last few months that integrity and intellectual honestly have taken a far, far distant back seat to rooting for the red team despite the fact it now has the worst imaginable quarterback. So, more the fool was I.

Actually I was anti-Berghdal long before the Trump presidency. It was known within his unit he walked off long before he was illegally traded for. So the fact that I am not a republican nor am I on team Trump which means your accusation does not hold water. All I ever wanted and expected was a just trial, and a just sentencing. Seeing as how several people had their lives ruined and turned upside down due to his decisions I have no problem with life in prison.

Here is just one reason you will be hard pressed to find anyone (who served in combat during current GWoT) willing to offer any emotional empathy to his plight:

"One of those injured included an Army National Guard sergeant who was shot in the head during a search mission that resulted in a traumatic brain injury that put him in a wheelchair with no ability to speak."

full article here.

 redleger wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 redleger wrote:
Yes we all know its illegal, its second week basic training classes discussing the law of war and UCMJ. The point I was making was regardless of undue influence defence he tried to make, he admitted to willfully and unlawfully doing exactly what he was charged with even though he understood the consequences. So all those thinking he deserves to be let off with a slap on the wrist and do not care about the lives he caused to be lost may not get what they want.

I was one of the people who originally was saying that no one knows for sure what the situation was when he first disappeared. There were rumors that he has deserted but at the time it was far from clear what had actually happened. Now that a better picture has emerged, then I don't see any problem with him prosecuted and sentenced appropriately, with the fact he was tortured for as long as he was as a mitigating factor when he's sentenced. I have no idea what an appropriate sentence would be so won't speculate on that.

The only reason that I mentioned the undue command influence is that there sure were a lot of of people on this very forum who popped monocles and called for their fainting couches when the former president said, essentially, "people who commit crimes should be prosecuted", but now a few years later wouldn't say gak if they had a mouthful when the current president specifically names a suspect and says he should be shot, he should be pushed out of an airplane without a parachute, and so on, and so forth, over and over again.

However I realize how very stupid I was to think I had a good point because there has been overwhelming evidence over the last few months that integrity and intellectual honestly have taken a far, far distant back seat to rooting for the red team despite the fact it now has the worst imaginable quarterback. So, more the fool was I.

Actually I was anti-Berghdal long before the Trump presidency. It was known within his unit he walked off long before he was illegally traded for. So the fact that I am not a republican nor am I on team Trump which means your accusation does not hold water. All I ever wanted and expected was a just trial, and a just sentencing. Seeing as how several people had their lives ruined and turned upside down due to his decisions I have no problem with life in prison.

Here is just one reason you will be hard pressed to find anyone (who served in combat during current GWoT) willing to offer any emotional empathy to his plight:

"One of those injured included an Army National Guard sergeant who was shot in the head during a search mission that resulted in a traumatic brain injury that put him in a wheelchair with no ability to speak."

full article here.

I don't think Ouze's statement was directed at you.

Now that all the facts are out, I think Bergdahl is a fool or worse and should spend his life in prison. We will see if 45's stupid mouth will mitigate that, though.

OgreChubbs wrote:
If he is found as anything other then mentally ill this is just sad.

He was ovbiously mentally ill at the time, no one just wonders off into an enemy city unarmed with no money or anything. Just wondering through the town for fun during a open conflict.

If this shows anything it is the lack of people being aware of the mental health of soldiers.

Dude... I serve with Soldiers. A lot of them are stupid. Really frakking stupid. And yes, I've met those that I'd believe are stupid enough to have done this.

 redleger wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 redleger wrote:
Yes we all know its illegal, its second week basic training classes discussing the law of war and UCMJ. The point I was making was regardless of undue influence defence he tried to make, he admitted to willfully and unlawfully doing exactly what he was charged with even though he understood the consequences. So all those thinking he deserves to be let off with a slap on the wrist and do not care about the lives he caused to be lost may not get what they want.

I was one of the people who originally was saying that no one knows for sure what the situation was when he first disappeared. There were rumors that he has deserted but at the time it was far from clear what had actually happened. Now that a better picture has emerged, then I don't see any problem with him prosecuted and sentenced appropriately, with the fact he was tortured for as long as he was as a mitigating factor when he's sentenced. I have no idea what an appropriate sentence would be so won't speculate on that.

The only reason that I mentioned the undue command influence is that there sure were a lot of of people on this very forum who popped monocles and called for their fainting couches when the former president said, essentially, "people who commit crimes should be prosecuted", but now a few years later wouldn't say gak if they had a mouthful when the current president specifically names a suspect and says he should be shot, he should be pushed out of an airplane without a parachute, and so on, and so forth, over and over again.

However I realize how very stupid I was to think I had a good point because there has been overwhelming evidence over the last few months that integrity and intellectual honestly have taken a far, far distant back seat to rooting for the red team despite the fact it now has the worst imaginable quarterback. So, more the fool was I.

Actually I was anti-Berghdal long before the Trump presidency. It was known within his unit he walked off long before he was illegally traded for. So the fact that I am not a republican nor am I on team Trump which means your accusation does not hold water. All I ever wanted and expected was a just trial, and a just sentencing. Seeing as how several people had their lives ruined and turned upside down due to his decisions I have no problem with life in prison.

Here is just one reason you will be hard pressed to find anyone (who served in combat during current GWoT) willing to offer any emotional empathy to his plight:

"One of those injured included an Army National Guard sergeant who was shot in the head during a search mission that resulted in a traumatic brain injury that put him in a wheelchair with no ability to speak."

full article here.

Can you source that from anywhere that isn't a mouthpiece for an incompetent administration?

https://www.stripes.com/news/command-sergeant-major-no-troops-died-searching-for-bergdahl-1.402016

Y'all are completely ignoring the elephant in the room and aren't asking the real question.

Does anyone have the movie rights to Bowe Bergdahl's captivity?

OgreChubbs wrote:
If he is found as anything other then mentally ill this is just sad.

He was ovbiously mentally ill at the time, no one just wonders off into an enemy city unarmed with no money or anything. Just wondering through the town for fun during a open conflict.

If this shows anything it is the lack of people being aware of the mental health of soldiers.

He pled guilty, therefore that IS going to be the verdict.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And the guilty plea negates any 'undue influence' defense, since there is no trial to be subject to undue influence. He avoids the trial by pleading guilty.

 avantgarde wrote:
Y'all are completely ignoring the elephant in the room and aren't asking the real question.

Does anyone have the movie rights to Bowe Bergdahl's captivity?

(Movie Trailer Voice) Mark Wahlberg is... Bowe Bergdahl!

 CptJake wrote:

OgreChubbs wrote:
If he is found as anything other then mentally ill this is just sad.

He was ovbiously mentally ill at the time, no one just wonders off into an enemy city unarmed with no money or anything. Just wondering through the town for fun during a open conflict.

If this shows anything it is the lack of people being aware of the mental health of soldiers.

He pled guilty, therefore that IS going to be the verdict.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And the guilty plea negates any 'undue influence' defense, since there is no trial to be subject to undue influence. He avoids the trial by pleading guilty.

In this case can he even appeal. Or is the guilt p! ee and sentence final he gonna have to serve what he gets?

 CptJake wrote:

OgreChubbs wrote:
If he is found as anything other then mentally ill this is just sad.

He was ovbiously mentally ill at the time, no one just wonders off into an enemy city unarmed with no money or anything. Just wondering through the town for fun during a open conflict.

If this shows anything it is the lack of people being aware of the mental health of soldiers.

He pled guilty, therefore that IS going to be the verdict.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And the guilty plea negates any 'undue influence' defense, since there is no trial to be subject to undue influence. He avoids the trial by pleading guilty.

Could undue influence (in general, not just this specific case) be used to appeal a sentence by claiming "I would have gotten X instead of Y without it"?

 d-usa wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

OgreChubbs wrote:
If he is found as anything other then mentally ill this is just sad.

He was ovbiously mentally ill at the time, no one just wonders off into an enemy city unarmed with no money or anything. Just wondering through the town for fun during a open conflict.

If this shows anything it is the lack of people being aware of the mental health of soldiers.

He pled guilty, therefore that IS going to be the verdict.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And the guilty plea negates any 'undue influence' defense, since there is no trial to be subject to undue influence. He avoids the trial by pleading guilty.

Could undue influence (in general, not just this specific case) be used to appeal a sentence by claiming "I would have gotten X instead of Y without it"?

Yes, as was the issue with the thread that Ouze linked earlier.

 redleger wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Every mission is a search and rescue mission if you throw in an "oh yeah, don't forget we are still looking for that dumbass, so if you see anything on this mission that has nothing to do with this at all please make a note of it" at the end of the briefing.

These two were wounded on missions specifically organized to search for Bergdahl.

https://www.stripes.com/news/command-sergeant-major-no-troops-died-searching-for-bergdahl-1.402016

Im pretty sure D-usa can not fathom what he did that is so bad and why many of us who served find it so repulsive and worth of capital punishment in accordance with the Uniformed Code of Military Justice. I am not sure what the old thread remarks hes referring to but I would bet he would be ok with just sending him home to momma and saying no harm no foul.

As the judge and potential jury are military (not sure who decides the punishment phase in a military trial), those deciding hi fate will indeed have a military history.
Having plead guilty he won't get the military's version of the death penalty. Thats already agreed to be off the table I am sure.

 Frazzled wrote:

 redleger wrote:

Relapse wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
Every mission is a search and rescue mission if you throw in an "oh yeah, don't forget we are still looking for that dumbass, so if you see anything on this mission that has nothing to do with this at all please make a note of it" at the end of the briefing.

These two were wounded on missions specifically organized to search for Bergdahl.

https://www.stripes.com/news/command-sergeant-major-no-troops-died-searching-for-bergdahl-1.402016

Im pretty sure D-usa can not fathom what he did that is so bad and why many of us who served find it so repulsive and worth of capital punishment in accordance with the Uniformed Code of Military Justice. I am not sure what the old thread remarks hes referring to but I would bet he would be ok with just sending him home to momma and saying no harm no foul.

As the judge and potential jury are military (not sure who decides the punishment phase in a military trial), those deciding hi fate will indeed have a military history.
Having plead guilty he won't get the military's version of the death penalty. Thats already agreed to be off the table I am sure.

So did he plea in exchange for life in jail?
Wanting to avoid that option entirely and not risking it.

I think he only plead to avoid a jury and to put his fate in the hands of a judge rather than an angry mob.

 d-usa wrote:
I think he only plead to avoid a jury and to put his fate in the hands of a judge rather than an angry mob.

I thought judge was in charge of sentence, not Jury.

Judges normally are former lawyers with extensive experience in law from both sides of the court room defense and prosecution.

The jury would not be deciding scentence just of guilty or not.