Potential Memorial Day Pardons

[GMDino]

Nothing like referring to your superiors as "morons" to get Trump on your side.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2019/11/21/donald-trump-block-removal-navy-seal-eddie-gallagher/4257573002/

Quote:President Donald Trump said Thursday that he will block possible military efforts to remove the Navy SEAL whose demotion over a war crimes charge he reversed last week.


"The Navy will NOT be taking away Warfighter and Navy Seal Eddie Gallagher’s Trident Pin," Trump tweeted. 
"This case was handled very badly from the beginning. Get back to business!"


Gallagher is one of the three defendants in war crimes cases in which Trump intervened last week, issuing pardons to two soldiers and restoring Gallagher's rank and pay.


Gallagher was accused of using a knife to murder a teenage Islamic State prisoner in Iraq and of killing other civilians. A military court found Gallagher not guilty of the most serious charges in July but convicted him of posing for a photo with the ISIS victim.


The Navy has since said it plans to review Gallagher's status as Navy SEAL, a decision that would likely result in Gallagher being removed from the elite commando community – the development Trump has vowed to block.

Quote:
[/url]Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump




The Navy will NOT be taking away Warfighter and Navy Seal Eddie Gallagher’s Trident Pin. This case was handled very badly from the beginning. Get back to business!

58K
8:30 AM - Nov 21, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy

[url=https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1197507542726909952]

Since his acquittal, Gallagher has been a frequent critic of the Navy, particularly fellow SEALs who testified against him. He has described top SEAL commanders as "morons."


While intervening in the Gallagher case, Trump has not pardoned him or vacated his court-martial conviction. He has acted to prevent punishment of Gallagher.


Gallagher's is one of several military justice cases that have become major causes for conservative commentators who say the men were treated unfairly.

On Friday, Trump also pardoned Army 1st Lt. Clint Lorance, who had been serving a 19-year sentence for ordering soldiers to fire on unarmed Afghan civilians, two of whom died. The president also granted a pardon to Maj. Matthew Golsteyn, who was charged with killing a suspected bombmaker.
Critics have hit Trump for intervening in the cases, saying he is undermining the military justice system.

In July, Trump ordered the withdrawal of military awards for the Navy attorneys who prosecuted Gallagher, saying they did an unfair job.

[GMDino]

This is going well.  

https://apnews.com/7902f59c504d427ca89a9bd3484a207d

Quote:Pentagon chief fires Navy secretary over SEAL controversy

osed a deal with the White House behind his back to resolve the SEAL’s case. (Andrew Vaughan/The Canadian Press via AP)
[/url]WASHINGTON (AP) — Defense Secretary Mark Esper has fired the Navy’s top official, ending a stunning clash between President Donald Trump and top military leadership over the fate of a SEAL accused of war crimes in Iraq.


Esper said Sunday that he had lost confidence in Navy Secretary Richard Spencer and alleged that Spencer proposed a deal with the White House behind his back to resolve the SEAL’s case. Trump has championed the matter of Navy Chief Petty Officer Edward Gallagher, who was acquitted of murder in the stabbing death of an Islamic State militant captive but [url=https://apnews.com/c3127152d029462b9590cd666e8fa0a1]convicted of posing with the corpse while in Iraq in 2017.

Spencer’s firing was a dramatic turn in the fast-changing and politically charged controversy. It exposed fissures in Trump’s relationship with the highest ranks of the U.S. military and raised questions about the appropriate role of a commander in chief in matters of military justice.


Gallagher was demoted from chief petty officer to a 1st class petty officer after his conviction by a military jury. Trump, however, restored Gallagher’s rank this month.


The situation escalated again in recent days.


On Wednesday, the Navy had notified Gallagher that he would face a Navy SEAL review board to determine if he should be allowed to remain in the elite force. While Trump then tweeted that he would not allow the Navy to remove Gallagher from the SEALs by taking away his Trident Pin, which designates a SEAL member, the White House told the Navy it could proceed as planned, according to a Navy officer who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters.


That initially appeared to defuse the situation. The Navy SEAL review board was due to hear Gallagher’s case on Dec. 2.
Spencer, speaking Saturday at an international security forum in Halifax, Nova Scotia, said that he did not consider a tweet by 
Trump a formal order to stop the Navy review board.


“I need a formal order to act,” Spencer said. He said of Trump’s tweets, “I don’t interpret them as a formal order.”


But on Sunday, Esper said he had learned that Spencer had “privately” proposed to the White House that Gallagher be allowed to retire in his current rank and without losing his status as a SEAL. Esper said Spencer had not told him of the proposal to the White House, causing him to lose “trust and confidence.”


A spokesperson for Spencer, Navy Cmdr. Sarah Higgins, said Spencer had no immediate comment. The White House did not provide details of Spencer’s alleged private proposal regarding Gallagher.

In yet another twist, Esper also directed on Sunday that Gallagher be allowed to retire at the end of this month, and that the Navy review board that was scheduled to hear his case starting Dec. 2 be cancelled. At Esper’s direction, Gallagher will be allowed to retire as a SEAL at his current rank.


That effectively gives Trump the outcome he sought.


In a letter to Trump acknowledging “my termination,” Spencer said he had concluded that he and the president appear no longer to share the same understanding of “the key principle of good order and discipline.”


“I cannot in good conscience obey an order that I believe violates the sacred oath I took in the presence of my family, my flag and my faith to support and defend the Constitution of the United States,” he wrote. He did not cite a specific order.
Chief Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman said Esper’s position had been that the Navy’s disciplinary process should be allowed to “play itself out objectively and deliberately.”


“However, at this point, given the events of the last few days,” Esper decided that Gallagher should be allowed to retain his SEAL status, Hoffman said. He said Esper had concluded that Gallagher could not, under the circumstances, receive a fair shake from the Navy.


In the written statement, Esper said of Spencer: “I am deeply troubled by this conduct shown by a senior DOD official. 
Unfortunately, as a result I have determined that Secretary Spencer no longer has my confidence to continue in his position. I wish Richard well.”


Gallagher, speaking Sunday on “Fox & Friends,” alleged the Navy was acting in retaliation.


“They could have taken my Trident at any time they wanted,” he said. “Now they’re trying to take it after the president restored my rank.”


Those who have their Trident pins removed will no longer be SEALs but could remain in the Navy. The Navy has revoked 154 Trident pins since 2011.


Spencer, 65, had served as Navy secretary since August 2017. He was a Wall Street investment banker and is a veteran of the Marine Corps. He and Esper were Pentagon peers during the period that Esper served as Army secretary, prior to being sworn in as defense secretary last July.


In a series of tweets Sunday evening, Trump said he had been unhappy with the Navy’s handling of the Gallagher case. 
“Likewise, large cost overruns from past administration’s contracting procedures were not addressed to my satisfaction,” Trump added without specifics.


Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., issued a statement saying Spencer “did the right thing” and “should be proud of standing up to President Trump when he was wrong, something too many in this Administration and the Republican Party are scared to do. Good order, discipline, and morale among the Armed Services must transcend politics, and Secretary Spencer’s commitment to these principles with not be forgotten.”


Sen. Jim Inhofe, the Oklahoma Republican who chairs the Armed Services Committee, said Trump and Esper “deserve to have a leadership team who has their trust and confidence.” He also acknowledged that he and Spencer had disagreed at times over the management of specific Navy programs.


Trump said he was nominating Kenneth Braithwaite, a retired Navy rear admiral and the current U.S. ambassador to Norway, to succeed Spencer. In a tweet, Trump called Braithwaite “a man of great achievement and success.”

[GMDino]

Really, really well....  

https://www.newsweek.com/navy-seal-eddie-gallagher-fox-friends-accuses-secretary-meddling-thanks-trump-war-crimes-trident-1473753

Quote:NAVY SEAL EDDIE GALLAGHER ACCUSES OFFICIAL OF 'MEDDLING' IN WAR CRIME CASE, SUGGESTS IT'S 'ALL ABOUT EGO'

Navy SEAL Edward Gallagher mocked one of the "mean girl" witnesses to his accused 2017 war crimes for "crying," and went on to thank President Donald Trump and claimed that top military officials with "egos" are "meddling" in his case.


Gallagher appeared on Fox & Friends Sunday morning just minutes after Trump personally touted the interview on Twitter. Last week, Trump tweeted that the Navy "will NOT" be taking away Gallagher's revered trident over his failure to uphold good order and discipline after Gallagher was accused and later acquitted of several war crimes, including the killing of Iraqi civilians and the murder of an ISIS captive with a hunting knife. However, Gallagher was convicted in July of one charge after he posed in several pictures with a dead teenaged captive, The New York Times reported.

Gallagher mocked his accusers and detractors, including Navy Rear Admiral Collin Green, whom he called "insubordinate" and having too much "ego." Gallagher said he plans to expose next week how the Secretary of the Navy, Richard Spencer, was "meddling in my case and trying to get organizations not to support me."


[color=rgba(12, 11, 11, 0.8)]RELATED STORIES
[/color]

• Fox News Guest Calls Commander of the Navy SEALs a 'Coward'
• Pardoned War Criminal Tells Donald Trump: 'I Love You Sir,' Blasts Critics
• Navy Officer Pardoned for War Crimes Expected to be Removed From SEALs
  

"This is all about ego and retaliation, this has nothing to do with good order or discipline. They could have taken my trident at any time they wanted. Now they're trying to take it after the president restored my rank," Gallagher said, before threatening to expose top Navy officials of corruption.

"We just filed an IG [office of the Inspector General complaint] exposing all of the corruption that's been going on during my case, starting with 'crying' Craig Miller all the way up to Admiral Green," he added. The reference was made toward Special Warfare Operator Chief Craig Miller, who alleged Gallagher brutally murdered a captive near Mosul in 2017, according to Navy Times.


On Saturday, Secretary of the Navy Spencer denied threatening to quit or get fired alongside Green should Trump halt the proceedings against Gallagher, The New York Times reported. "Contrary to popular belief, I'm still here and I did not threaten to resign," Spencer said. "Let's just say we're here to talk about external threats and Eddie Gallagher is not one of them."


Speaking Sunday with Fox News host Pete Hegseth, Gallagher had a chance to thank Trump directly for repeatedly intervening on his behalf.

Quote:
[/url]Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump




Congratulations to Navy Seal Eddie Gallagher, his wonderful wife Andrea, and his entire family. You have been through much together. Glad I could help!

[url=https://twitter.com/intent/like?tweet_id=1146430380981067777]119K
9:47 AM - Jul 3, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy

"I just want to let [Trump] know that the rest of the SEAL community is not about this right now, they respect the president, and what the admiral [Green] is doing is showing complete insubordination and is not the good example of 'good order and discipline," Gallagher said.



"It's the higher echelon, the upper Navy brass who are the ones who are trying to put their thumb on me," he added.


In July, Gallagher was acquitted of charges stemming from accusations he shot civilians, murdered a captive ISIS fighter with a hunting knife, and threatened to retaliate by killing any fellow SEALs who might report him, said The New York Times. Gallagher was court-martialed but ultimately acquitted on those charges.


However, Gallagher was demoted after being convicted on the lone charge of bringing discredit to the U.S. armed forces by posing for pictures next to the body of a dead teenaged prisoner.


Tyler Merritt, an Army veteran, appeared alongside Gallagher on Fox & Friends to say "the real war fighters are disgusted, [the Navy is] destroying recruitment ... Let's get back to business, business is war fighting."


Gallagher commended other SEALs for "going against the grain" and said many are also being targeted by Navy brass for "calling out these mean girls for lying," referring to other SEALs who testified against him.


"I just want to retire peacefully with all the honors that I've earned and get back to my family," he added.


Earlier this month, Trump angered military officials after he cleared three members of other branches who were convicted of war crimes. One of them also appeared on Fox & Friends to thank the president for intervening.


"Congratulations to Navy Seal Eddie Gallagher, his wonderful wife Andrea, and his entire family. You have been through much together. Glad I could help!" Trump tweeted on July 3, following Gallagher's acquittal on all but one war crime charge.

Hegseth, who also served in Iraq, repeatedly downplayed or dismissed the "so-called war crimes" charged against Gallagher. He characterized the allegations by saying he was "found guilty of one charge, taking a photograph."


But a juror who spoke to The New York Times earlier this year relayed the accusations against Gallagher in a much darker tone: "People keep saying all he [Gallagher] did is pose in a photo and there were lots of other guys in the photo," said the juror who requested anonymity. "But he was the senior enlisted guy there, the oldest, the most experienced. He should have set an example for good order and discipline. He should have ensured stuff like that wasn't happening. And he didn't. He doesn't deserve to wear chief's anchors."

Again, seems he really respects his superiors and his "oath".

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

Not commenting on the rest of it, but it seems a bit much to court martial and demote a guy for posing with a dead body. Riddle that dude with bullets, good job. Take a picture with his corpse, court martial! Given that standard every guy who served in the Pacific theater in WW2 would be in Levenworth for life. I completely understand why the military doesn't want that kind of thing happening, but a formal court martial still seems extreme.

It reminds me of the line in Apocalypse Now, " We train young men to drop fire on people, but we won't let them write f%@k on their airplane, because it's obscene."

[GMDino]

(11-25-2019, 01:05 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Not commenting on the rest of it, but it seems a bit much to court martial and demote a guy for posing with a dead body.  Riddle that dude with bullets, good job.  Take a picture with his corpse, court martial!  Given that standard every guy who served in the Pacific theater in WW2 would be in Levenworth for life.  I completely understand why the military doesn't want that kind of thing happening, but a formal court martial still seems extreme.

It reminds me of the line in Apocalypse Now, " We train young men to drop fire on people, but we won't let them write f%@k on their airplane, because it's obscene."

War, from what I am told, is hell.

But we hold ourselves to higher standards than the "barbarians" we are fighting.  

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-25-2019, 01:26 PM)GMDino Wrote: War, from what I am told, is hell.

But we hold ourselves to higher standards than the "barbarians" we are fighting.  

That doesn't address my point at all.  I stated that a court martial and demotion is an extreme reaction to posing with a dead body.  Of course we hold ourselves to a higher standard than our enemies, which is why we don't carpet bomb cities, deliberately target civilians and in fact place our soldiers in more danger to avoid doing so.  Any more obvious statements you'd like to make that don't address the points being made?

[GMDino]

(11-25-2019, 01:34 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: That doesn't address my point at all.  I stated that a court martial and demotion is an extreme reaction to posing with a dead body.  Of course we hold ourselves to a higher standard than our enemies, which is why we don't carpet bomb cities, deliberately target civilians and in fact place our soldiers in more danger to avoid doing so.  Any more obvious statements you'd like to make that don't address the points being made?

...and why we don't pose with dead bodies of the enemy anymore.

Anything else to add to the list to explain why we court martialed and demoted him?

Or do you just want to say you know more than the military does when it comes to how to fight wrs and protect our soldiers?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-25-2019, 01:45 PM)GMDino Wrote: ...and why we don't pose with dead bodies of the enemy anymore.

[

So, you consider these things to be equivalent?

Quote:Anything else to add to the list to explain why we court martialed and demoted him?

Nothing I mentioned in that post is why he was court martialed.

Quote:Or do you just want to say you know more than the military does when it comes to how to fight wrs and protect our soldiers?

Oh, you're right, the military is an infallible organization that never makes a mistake.  The sound you hear right now is every veteran doubling over with laughter.  You think it's an appropriate response to destroy a person's career because they took a picture with a dead body, I think it's a huge overreaction.   

[GMDino]

(11-25-2019, 01:52 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: [

So, you consider these things to be equivalent?



Nothing I mentioned in that post is why he was court martialed.

Was it for posing with a dead body? Okay then.

(11-25-2019, 01:52 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Oh, you're right, the military is an infallible organization that never makes a mistake.  The sound you hear right now is every veteran doubling over with laughter.  You think it's an appropriate response to destroy a person's career because they took a picture with a dead body, I think it's a huge overreaction.   

Oh, did I say anything you said in that paragraph? No.

He didn't only pose with the dead body but everyone knows that.

Anyway at least he's attacking everyone and defending Trump so you got that going for you.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-25-2019, 02:04 PM)GMDino Wrote: Was it for posing with a dead body?  Okay then.

Yeah, which you appear to think is on par with carpet bombing cities.

Quote:Oh, did I say anything you said in that paragraph?  No.

He didn't only pose with the dead body but everyone knows that.

Ahh, you finally made a cogent point, albeit unintentionally.  The demotion for posing with the corpse was about getting him for something after the other case fell apart.

Quote:Anyway at least he's attacking everyone and defending Trump so you got that going for you.

Don't use your usual tactic and try and change the subject.  Do you think it's appropriate to destroy a person's career because they posed with a corpse?  His other actions aren't the topic at hand.

[fredtoast]

(11-25-2019, 01:05 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote:  I completely understand why the military doesn't want that kind of thing happening, but a formal court martial still seems extreme.

If you understand why they have rules against it then why don't you think people should be punished for btreaking those rules?  Gallagher was not just punished for posing wuith the body.  He was punished for being the officer in command and allowing this breech of the rules.

[GMDino]

(11-25-2019, 02:11 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yeah, which you appear to think is on par with carpet bombing cities.




Ahh, you finally made a cogent point, albeit unintentionally.  The demotion for posing with the corpse was about getting him for something after the other case fell apart.



Don't use your usual tactic and try and change the subject.  Do you think it's appropriate to destroy a person's career because they posed with a corpse?  His other actions aren't the topic at hand.

I think the sky is blue on a sunny day.

[fredtoast]

(11-25-2019, 02:11 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Don't use your usual tactic and try and change the subject.  Do you think it's appropriate to destroy a person's career because they posed with a corpse?  His other actions aren't the topic at hand.

It was not just the posing.  It was the fact that he was in charge and allowed the picture.

What punishment do you think he should have received?

[GMDino]

(11-25-2019, 02:18 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It was not just the posing.  It was the fact that he was in charge and allowed the picture.

What punishment do you think he should have received?

The jury recommended the reduction in rank.

Trials, juries, law, morals, ethics...none of that matters as long as Trump is involved.  Nor with his supporters.

[*bfine32*]

(11-25-2019, 01:05 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Not commenting on the rest of it, but it seems a bit much to court martial and demote a guy for posing with a dead body.  Riddle that dude with bullets, good job.  Take a picture with his corpse, court martial!  Given that standard every guy who served in the Pacific theater in WW2 would be in Levenworth for life.  I completely understand why the military doesn't want that kind of thing happening, but a formal court martial still seems extreme.

It reminds me of the line in Apocalypse Now, " We train young men to drop fire on people, but we won't let them write f%@k on their airplane, because it's obscene."

It is absurd but I absolutely support the decision to punish Gallgher for this action. He was doing nothing in efforts to safeguard anyone. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-25-2019, 02:33 PM)bfine32 Wrote: It is absurd but I absolutely support the decision to punish Gallgher for this action. He was doing nothing in efforts to safeguard anyone. 

I agree that a punishment was in order, but a formal court martial and reduction in rank seems extreme to me.Just have an O6 or higher NJP him, especially for a first offense.

[GMDino]

Pentagon says:

1) Spencer makes private offer to White House that would allow Eddie Gallagher to keep his Trident if Trump did not intervene.

2) Trump intervenes anyway.

3) Esper finds out about Spencer's offer, forces him out.

4) Esper will allow Gallagher to keep Trident.

— Dan Lamothe (@DanLamothe) November 24, 2019

 

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(11-25-2019, 01:05 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Not commenting on the rest of it, but it seems a bit much to court martial and demote a guy for posing with a dead body. Riddle that dude with bullets, good job. Take a picture with his corpse, court martial! Given that standard every guy who served in the Pacific theater in WW2 would be in Levenworth for life. I completely understand why the military doesn't want that kind of thing happening, but a formal court martial still seems extreme.

It reminds me of the line in Apocalypse Now, " We train young men to drop fire on people, but we won't let them write f%@k on their airplane, because it's obscene."

As you know the court martial involved a murder case, not just posing with a dead body. A charge such as murder will only involve trial by court martial, not NJP.

Also, the rules are the rules whether you agree with them or not. If you don’t follow the rules you can be charged with disobeying a lawful order at a minimum which is no-no especially for senior NCOs.

Service members in SOCOM units can be kicked out at any time for not upholding unit standards. I’ve seen guys kicked out of the Ranger Regiment for stuff that didn’t even involve UCMJ action and the president never stepped in. Trump’s involvement in the SEALs deciding who will/won’t be a unit member is gross micromanagement. Plus he’s politicizing a military discipline matter while ignoring advice from senior SEAL commanders and the Secretary of the Navy who know a helluva lot more than he does.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(11-25-2019, 04:08 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: As you know the court martial involved a murder case, not just posing with a dead body. A charge such as murder will only involve trial by court martial, not NJP.

Of course. 

Quote:Also, the rules are the rules whether you agree with them or not. If you don’t follow the rules you can be charged with disobeying a lawful order at a minimum which is no-no especially for senior NCOs.

Also, of course.  But would you not agree that within that frame there is a lot of latitude.  A reduction in rank is a career ender.  That seems excessive to me for posing with a corpse.

Quote:Service members in SOCOM units can be kicked out at any time for not upholding unit standards. I’ve seen guys kicked out of the Ranger Regiment for stuff that didn’t even involve UCMJ action and the president never stepped in. Trump’s involvement in the SEALs deciding who will/won’t be a unit member is gross micromanagement. Plus he’s politicizing a military discipline matter while ignoring advice from senior SEAL commanders and the Secretary of the Navy who know a helluva lot more than he does.

I agree with everything you said here.  I don't like Trump intervening in this.  My only issue is the punishment seeming excessive and a shot at him because the murder case fell apart.  I just don't agree with ending a man's career because he posed with a corpse.  Should every such case result in a court martial?  I would hope not and still acknowledge that this specific case is an outlier in this regard.

[*bfine32*]

(11-25-2019, 02:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I agree that a punishment was in order, but a formal court martial and reduction in rank seems extreme to me.Just have an O6 or higher NJP him, especially for a first offense.

Perhaps, but the greater the rank the greater the responsibility. I recall those idiots down at Gitmo posing with POWs, but the were enlisted reservists (I believe). This guy was/is a Senior Enlisted with over 18 years of Service. His career is over; with or with out the Courts martial.

We had a saying when I was in. Our job is to defend indicidual freedoms, not exercise them.