War Crime Pardons

Found this article on CNN. It doesn't surprise me that several people telling Trump this is a good idea.

Trump's pardons appear prompted by TV, friends and politics - CNNPolitics

The problem I have is the man was a prisoner, in the guys care. You don't treat prisoners like that, nor do you kill them. This sounds like the wrong person to give a pardon to.

RDKirk said:

There has been nothing said about him being wrongly convicted. If a wrongful conviction had been the case, should there have been an appeal of the original conviction?

Click to expand...

There was an appeal. The CAAF heard his appeal and decided it was without merit.

This sends the message that “justice” is what Dear Leader says it is, never mind the UCMJ (or heck, even the Constitution says).

This will make it much more dangerous for US forces, since any enemy they face will know that “there are no rules” that the Americans MUST follow, and that means the enemy will not surrender (knowing that, as prisoners, they could be killed by gung-ho Americans, who will not face consequences).

Paulos23 said:

Found this article on CNN. It doesn't surprise me that several people telling Trump this is a good idea.

Trump's pardons appear prompted by TV, friends and politics - CNNPolitics

The problem I have is the man was a prisoner, in the guys care. You don't treat prisoners like that, nor do you kill them. This sounds like the wrong person to give a pardon to.

Click to expand...

Indeed. Ignoring the moral aspect of it (because as a heathen, trying to lecture about morals here on CF is going to be summarily dismissed), or the reciprocal aspect -- as in no American POW is ever going to be treated humanely if this continues (because it's treasonous to suggest that a 'Murican soldier will ever be captured)...

How about the pragmatic aspect? As in, if we kill our prisoners, nobody will surrender. Meaning...

1. All our conflicts will be that much longer,
2. Enemies willing to fight to the last man are more likely to take a few of our soldiers with them,
3. Dead enemies can't be interrogated.

Donald is developing some weapons-grade stupidity by rewarding and encouraging such behavior.

Arcangl86 said:

There was an appeal. The CAAF heard his appeal and decided it was without merit.

Click to expand...

I knew there was because appeals are automatic in the military for such cases.

And Der Alter, given what he said about himself, also knows appeals are automatic.

Which, IMO, puts his claim that nobody knows whether the court-martial was unjust on thin ice. We might as well claim that we don't know if any trial was unjust.

Goonie said:

Don't be surprised when people who in other threads are claiming to be pro_life, demonstrate that falsehoood on this thread.

Click to expand...

I wonder exactly what kind of logic refuses to see the immeasurable difference between an innocent child, and an enemy who literally wants you and everyone you care about dead
Here's hoping Trump actually delivers on this.

Arcangl86 said:

I think this is dangerous for reasons that the article posted by @RocksInMyHead state well. But even besides that, the timing makes it fairly obvious this is meant to be a PR stunt.

Click to expand...

If it's a PR stunt or not doesn't matter. If it means that people who don't deserve the treatment they got, can get back with what remains of their lives that weren't stolen from them, it's still great.

Paulos23 said:

The pardon just shows how poorly Trump thinks of the law.

Click to expand...

Or how much he thinks of those who serve their country?

Paulos23 said:

This sounds like the wrong person to give a pardon to.

Click to expand...

No. It's exactly the right person.

DanishLutheran said:

I wonder exactly what kind of logic refuses to see the immeasurable difference between an innocent child, and an enemy who literally wants you and everyone you care about dead
Here's hoping Trump actually delivers on this.

Click to expand...

One of the people being court-martialed is being court-martialed, for among other things, killing noncombatants, including a small child.

DanishLutheran said:

If it's a PR stunt or not doesn't matter. If it means that people who don't deserve the treatment they got, can get back with what remains of their lives that weren't stolen from them, it's still great.

Click to expand...

Actually yes it does. The fact that this came out of nowhere with the intention of being rolled out by memorial day weekend is pretty strong indication that Trump is more concerned with the publicity he can get from this instead of any real concern for justice. I think that's especially true since he's talking about cutting short several court martials in progress.

Or how much he thinks of those who serve their country?

Click to expand...

Not that much apparently if he thinks that they are incapable of following the rules and being held to certain standards.

No. It's exactly the right person.

Click to expand...

The guy who specifically violated orders and ended up killing an unarmed prisoner? A man who is already out on parole, which a civilian imprisoned by the federal government isn't entitled to. The pardon does two things. It shortens his parole, and it indicates approval of what he did.

What the wonderful democratic media arm is not saying:

• Dr. MacDonnell is not called to testify in the case and instead is sent home. Just before leaving the courthouse he picks up his coat from the prosecution room and says to the three prosecutors (Megan Poirier, Jason Elbert, and Erwin Roberts), ‘The explanation that Lt Behenna just testified to was the exact same scenario I told you yesterday. Lt Behenna is telling the truth.’
• Jack Zimmermann, defense counsel, asks prosecutors if they have any exculpatory evidence that should be provided to the defense (referring to Dr. MacDonnell’s demonstration). Prosecutors deny having any such evidence despite having been told by their own expert witness that Lt Behenna’s explanation was the only logical explanation.
• Prosecutors withholding of this evidence allowed them to argue that Lt. Behenna executed Ali Mansur while seated when the forensic experts, including Dr. MacDonnell, agree that Ali was standing with his arms outstretched when shot

Hmmm....

hislegacy said:

What the wonderful democratic media arm is not saying:

• Dr. MacDonnell is not called to testify in the case and instead is sent home. Just before leaving the courthouse he picks up his coat from the prosecution room and says to the three prosecutors (Megan Poirier, Jason Elbert, and Erwin Roberts), ‘The explanation that Lt Behenna just testified to was the exact same scenario I told you yesterday. Lt Behenna is telling the truth.’
• Jack Zimmermann, defense counsel, asks prosecutors if they have any exculpatory evidence that should be provided to the defense (referring to Dr. MacDonnell’s demonstration). Prosecutors deny having any such evidence despite having been told by their own expert witness that Lt Behenna’s explanation was the only logical explanation.
• Prosecutors withholding of this evidence allowed them to argue that Lt. Behenna executed Ali Mansur while seated when the forensic experts, including Dr. MacDonnell, agree that Ali was standing with his arms outstretched when shot

Hmmm....

Click to expand...

Source?

hislegacy said:

What the wonderful democratic media arm is not saying:

• Dr. MacDonnell is not called to testify in the case and instead is sent home. Just before leaving the courthouse he picks up his coat from the prosecution room and says to the three prosecutors (Megan Poirier, Jason Elbert, and Erwin Roberts), ‘The explanation that Lt Behenna just testified to was the exact same scenario I told you yesterday. Lt Behenna is telling the truth.’
• Jack Zimmermann, defense counsel, asks prosecutors if they have any exculpatory evidence that should be provided to the defense (referring to Dr. MacDonnell’s demonstration). Prosecutors deny having any such evidence despite having been told by their own expert witness that Lt Behenna’s explanation was the only logical explanation.
• Prosecutors withholding of this evidence allowed them to argue that Lt. Behenna executed Ali Mansur while seated when the forensic experts, including Dr. MacDonnell, agree that Ali was standing with his arms outstretched when shot

Hmmm....

Click to expand...

What your wonderful conservative media arm isn't telling you is that the appeals court found that none of that mattered, since his self-defense claim was negated by the fact that he was the aggressor.

I would also point out that, while the NYT article in the OP didn't mention the appeal at all, it did link to this rather thorough recounting of the whole story, which did include the appeals:
The story of Michael Behenna and Mad Dog 5: “Self-defense” in war - SCOTUSblog

Imagine being the kind of person who would rather have fellow countrymen murdered, than a terrorist dispatched.

I somehow don't get the feeling that your main concern is those who serve in the military at all?

RocksInMyHead said:

No, it's not my main concern. Why should it be? Our military is far from the most important thing in my life.

Click to expand...

Thanks for admitting that the concern you claimed to show for military personnel in the post I responded to, was bovine manure. Though it would have suited you to not go there, in that case.

RDKirk said:

There has been nothing said about him being wrongly convicted. If a wrongful conviction had been the case, should there have been an appeal of the original conviction?

Click to expand...

How could there be a “wrongful conviction” when he entered a guilty plea?

DanishLutheran said:

If it's a PR stunt or not doesn't matter. If it means that people who don't deserve the treatment they got, can get back with what remains of their lives that weren't stolen from them, it's still great.



Or how much he thinks of those who serve their country?



No. It's exactly the right person.

Click to expand...

Serving your country, doesnt allow one to commit crimes.