05-24-2019, 03:25 AM
(05-23-2019, 06:32 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Now you may thing a photo op with the parents on the Rose Lawn and urging sympathy for Bergdahl would have no influence on a court of law, but there are many that do. Personally I found it disgusting.
Jeezus. There are not "many that do."
You would never find it disgusting to secure the freedom of an American soldier.
But you found it "disgusting" that Obama made a public announcement when a mentally unstable soldier who went awol was returned as a POW in diplomatic negotiations to end a war--and then showed public sympathy for the parents' suffering.
What military prosecutor would suppose that the announcement of a prisoner return, and a boost for hopeful parents, was "pressure" signalling that Obama wanted Bergdahl let off easy?
What prosecutor could assume that Trump wanted justice to take its course, given all his direct comments regarding what the outcome of Bergdahl's trial should be? Some comments coming AFTER HE FIRED COMEY for continuing an investigation Trump wanted shut down, thus showing his readiness to meddle in legal processes heretofore supposed autonomous.
This is some very SELECTIVE disgust, given the current president's history of service and his shameful comments about actual war heroes, and his actual, public and blatant exercise of undue influence in the Bergdahl case and others.
You could have spent your energy on this thread explaining what a bad signal it sends the world about the US and US military standards when a president floats the possibility of pardoning war criminals--an idea broached by a Foxspert, not his own DOJ.
Instead you throw post after post in a failed attempt to construct an utterly purposeless false equivalence and hype disgust on "undo influence" which never was.
We "allowed" Matt Maupin to be executed? WTF?
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
