CBS News reports that military judge Colonel Jeffrey Nance decided that Bowe Bergdahl will serve no jail time for his walkabout from his base which resulted in five years captivity by the Haqqani Network of terrorists.
Army Col. Judge Jeffery R. Nance said Bergdahl will be dishonorably discharged and have his rank reduced to private. He issued the ruling Friday after nearly two weeks of sentencing proceedings that included testimony by Bergdahl’s former comrades. Bergdahl, 31, was held by the Taliban for five years before being released in a prisoner swap in 2014.
Really, are you surprised?
The prosecution asked for 14 years and Nance couldn’t even give Bergdahl a day.
Does he merit (wrong word) POW plates?
Does POW status buy him VA benefits despite the Dishonorable Discharge?
Not right now…they refused to award him a POW medal. His lawyer is trying to get it awarded in the appeals process as well as overturn the DD yadda yadda yadda.
If his conviction stands the charge he plead guilty to and thus his admitted conduct in itself disqualifies him for the POW medal and status.
I guess he can hope for a deserter plate to be made and proudly display that.
If I’m correct, now that he’s been convicted of a crime, they can revoke his purple heart and every other deployment award he got.
I don’t know of any legal or regulatory ability to revoke awards with a few exceptions (i.e. qual badges/tabs, etc) based on a GCM conviction
It’s interesting to note that in Commonwealth Nations they do in fact routinely revoke all awards and decorations as a results of a court martial conviction
Have a question that hopefully someone can provide info. I am not smart when it comes to the Military Justice system, even though I have sat on Court Martial Boards, am familiar with USMJ and the Chapters under AR 635-200.
When one receives a DD, what is the purpose of reducing their rank to E1? Why not reduce them to Zero/Nothing? What happens if an E1 receives a DD? How can they be reduced in rank if they are already the lowest rank in the Army?
Is it for humiliation purposes?Tradition? Is it for “pay” purposes, which does not make sense if a Soldier has to forfeit all pay and benefits, which means no ID Card, no medical benefits, no VA benefits, no burial in a Military Cemetary, Nothing.(Unless I am wrong).
Heck, they will not be able to wear all their finery they received before the DD, to include the Uniform with the E1 stripe.
Why not completely “Brand” them, i.e. take away their finery and E1 stripe.
Never understood this (it just does not make sense) so could someone please enlighten this ignorant Soldier?
Thank you.
When one receives a DD, what is the purpose of reducing their rank to E1?
E-1 is the lowest rank; you can’t be reduced below it. Under 10 U.S.C. 858a, you get automatically reduced to E-1 if your sentence includes a punitive discharge.
Under 10 U.S.C. 858b, he would’ve gotten some automatic pay forfeitures if his sentence had included jail time as well as the DD.
Sometimes penalties can be deferred by the convening authority…I’ve seen guys keep their pay until the convening authority approved the sentence (generally in cases where the pay was going to family members)…so details like this can sometimes make a difference.
In general, though, DD means E-1, and there is no mechanism for reducing someone to “E-0” or anything like it. And the old-time rituals of humiliation aren’t allowed anymore, just as public executions aren’t done anymore, whether or not they should be.
E1’s have no “stripe” to take away.
Thank You, Alberich and GoldenDragon.
E1 is a stripe, so why not have it taken off to no stripes? (Am serious and not joking).
Yes, am aware there is no such creature a EO, but why let a DD “Soldier” retain the Rank of Enlisted, PVT, if they are basically kicked out of the Army and are no longer recognized as being a Soldier? It just does not make sense to me. That is why I wrote that when one receives a DD, that they go back to the same status they had before they joined: to be a Civilian or a Mr. or Ms. or Mrs. instead being a Private.
And again, what happens to E1s that receive DD? Common sense dictates they cannot be reduced to E1.
When I speak of humilation, I am talking about someone trying to get a job…and if they have to show their DD214, it will have E1. Not all potential employers are familiar with codes on a DD214, but I suspect they will recognize E1 or Private (PVT) on a DD214. Would that not be humilating to a former “Soldier” especially if they served 5-10 years?
Thank you for your patience. I still don’t understand the reduction to Enlisted 1/ Private or see the value of giving them that Rank since they are no longer in the Army, will never be able to return to the Army because of their DD.
GoldenDragon: You were right and I was wrong. I screwed up royally.
As you said, E1s do not have Stripes. Completely forgotten E2s are Privates (PV2) and have the Mosquito Wings.
No Excuse, Drill Sgt. Don’t know what I was thinking since I was once Enlisted. (Going to the corner and putting on my Dunce Cap…) 😖😔🙁😟
And again, what happens to E1s that receive DD? Common sense dictates they cannot be reduced to E1.
Right. They just stay there.
When I speak of humilation, I am talking about someone trying to get a job…and if they have to show their DD214, it will have E1.
More importantly, it will have “DD,” which will send a bad enough message, at least to the kinds of employers who care.
I still don’t understand the reduction to Enlisted 1/ Private or see the value of giving them that Rank since they are no longer in the Army, will never be able to return to the Army because of their DD.
Well, one thing to keep in mind is this: if Bergdahl gets relief on appeal, the different parts of the sentence may matter.
Suppose the Army Court of Criminal Appeals decides that Mr. Trump’s most recent comments are a terrible kind of UCI. They may say, “We are going to disapprove the dishonorable discharge, but leave in place the pay forfeitures and the reduction to E-1.” At that point the reduction matters a great deal…it’s the only sentence left. (That is one reason I wish Mr. Trump would keep quiet about this until the Army court is through with it.)
In general, the convening authority (usually a general officer who sent the cases to court-martial) has the power to reduce a sentence, but never increase it. So if the convening authority disapproves the DD (not likely in Bergdahl’s case, but in other cases it might happen), then the remainder of the sentence increases in importance…because it’s all there is.
There may be other post-service implications I don’t know about–my experience is with court-martial and pretty well stops once the appeals process is over.
Thank you,again, Alberich. What you wrote makes sense. Once again, I learned something new.👍
EIOU1.
Let this chicken, cowardly judge serve the 14 years then! A brand on the boys forehead would be a nice touch, since the chicken (shyt) colonel decided to give him a free ride!
I’m wondering how long it takes for him to accidentally get his knees broken walking outside or falling down a couple flights of stairs at the local single-story bar. No witnesses and anyone accused has an air-tight alibi through the local VFW or American Legion Post (they were of course there for the entire day).
I also wonder how long before those injured, and the families of those deceased, while looking for him file their lawsuits. The guilty plea opens him up for all kinds of wonderful civil “discourse.”
Is that for certain he can be sued?
No, it isn’t certain. Problem #1, you need “proximate causation” for injury claims, and he can argue that the enemy action was the real proximate cause; problem #2, there are legal doctrines out there (I’m not researching them now) that make it very difficult to recover for war injuries–even if they were the result of really bad decisions.
Someone who knows that area better than I do may have a different answer, but mine is: don’t get your hopes up. It rankles, but he’s likely suffered all he’s going to, and he may get more relief based on Mr. Trump’s continuing comments.
Cocksucker should have been hung. Probably get a book deal. Colonel is a dumb fuck.
In today’s climate, the book deal seems likely. Unfortunately.
Perhaps he was/is hung- who cares? He should be hanged.
Col. Nancy should be given a big chicken dinner + reduction to E-1 + forfeiture of all pay and benefits. May Turdahl never know a moment of peace for the rest of his existence. He should have been sent to GTMO wearing a dress, lipstick and high heel hooves. And not even a can of Crisco for man train.
Pardon my French, but FUCK YOU NANCE.
What she said.
Complete fucking disgrace.
Nance is probably one of the many Obama ass kissers that still infest the Army.
I heard this verdict this morning, and nearly went into my first tirade in a couple of years. It would have resulted in my arrest.
That this “man” could actually walk away from his post, IN A COMBAT ZONE RIGHT IN FRONT OF THE ENEMY, and not get at least ONE FUCKING DAY in prison is the worst miscarriage of justice since…well since EVER!!
And then the Ivory Tower dwellers wonder why the “unwashed masses” don’t trust the justice system, the government, or believe in Santa Clause anymore.
Please God, don’t let Obama release a statement stating how happy he is with the verdict.
I wouldn’t be able to stop throwing up for a month.
You are ONLY allowed to vomit if you find him and do it right in his face. Are we clear on this?
Yes ma’am!
I have friends who were kicked to the curb between 14 and 17 years by the Army’s High Royalty Command (HRC) as part of the reduction of force the Obama Regime instituted for any and every excuse they could find. Why? To get them kicked out before sanctuary so no retirement pension. But, if you get people killed, have sex with subordinates (or their wives), cause great harm and damage to your own troops and/or the US Military, “meh, no big deal”.
The fact that no jail time is part of this is incredible. Just utterly ridiculous, even with the prosecutor asking for 14 years, as “something” would’ve been a good thing. No jail time? WTF were you thinking Nancy boy? Holy fuckballs.
Seems Nance should stick around, he’d be the epitome of a currently serving douchebag Flag Officer these days.
Sadly this came as no surprise to me. The fix has been in on this whole Bergdahl fiasco since Obama walked into the Rose Garden to announce the prisoner swap. It is things like this that make me ashamed to say I ever wore a uniform.
No, no Dragoon 45, you and all the other loyal military are the best and finest Americans. All of us owe you more than we can possibly repay. You are our only hope for freedom and justice. Every time I see the flag I have goosebumps, reflecting what it represents and I am outraged when I see the disrespect of the idiots who have no understanding of how privileged we Americans aredue to the sacrifices you in the military make daily. The previous CIC was disgraceful and betrayed the military in reducing senior officers, among other irrational ‘decrees’, showed little appreciation for their loyalty and devotion to duty. But he and she do not represent the heart of America. Please know that when you are in uniform, you wear it for me and all grateful Americans. bo is the person who should be filled with shame and regret. I am an old lady 80 years old and if they come after me, my last words will be ‘God bless America!’ Thank you all…… e.conboy
former-Pres. Obama can give him a job. https://www.obama.org/opportunities/
Yeah . A blow job .
It was so blatantly obvious the fix was in as soon as the Shitbag who’s name I will never mention pled guilty with no pre-conditions. There was NO reason for him to do that unless he already knew what was going to happen.
Yeah, trust the system, it’s not rigged. Nope, not at all.
What a message it sends to currently serving troops.
Excuse me while I go throw up.
You guys are giving this waste of protein far too much time, although I do understand your need to vent your frustrations.
We have to remember that convicted murderers, with irrefutable evidence against them, have tried repeatedly and failed to get their sentences reduced or vacated. And some of them, like Drew Peterson, are stupid enough to try to hire a fellow con who is leaving jail to kill the prosecutor that convicted them.
My view of this is that ostracism is the best policy for a variety of reasons, one of them being that a scumbag who betrayed his fellows does not deserve the benefit of being considered to be one of them. So long as bergdahl’s face is on the internet and wherever else it appears, he should not be welcomed by any military AD or otherwise (long out like me).
If he isn’t going to spend any time in jail, fine. But no one has to acknowledge his existence, either.
In other news, COL Nance announced his new position at Fusion GPS…
Anyone want to take a bet that this POS gets a job with the NFL as pert of their outreach to the military community?
Bergdahl, not Nance…but then, why rule him out too? And it’s “part” not pert… my mistake
I am disappointed in the sentence, but…
As military professionals we should take a deep breath and consider that while the judge may have elect Bergdahl off easy, the Army and it’s Soldiers as well as all the servicemen and women connected with this in any way have consistenty acted honorably and in the finest traditions of the service.
None of those men and women liked Bergdahl or what he did, but they risked their lives to bring him home. In the words of one of the SEALS, he was an American and he had a mother. That was enough reason to get him out, even if it was to face justice.
Did he get justice? I don’t know. I would have liked some jail time, but what does that really matter?
On this blog we consistently note that valor thieves should be satisfied with an Honorable Dishcarge, no matter what they did in the service, because that is the important thing. Bergdahl doesn’t have that. He’ll never be able to tell his son about honorable service, ad he’ll never go to a reunion and sing Gory Gory Hallelujah arm in arm with his drunken buddies. He’ll never go to college on the GI Bill.
Despite how awkward it is when people thank me for my service, I know it is as it should be. How many will thank Bergdahl for his service? A few, probably, but Bergdahl will know they are wrong to thank him because instead of making the world a better place he selfishly put himself above others and caused real harm. He’ll know he’ll be living a lie.
Does that matter to Bergdahl? Maybe. I don’t know. It matters to me, though, and I see the actions of the people around Bergdahl as more important than his actions because they show me that Soldiers will still fight and die for their brothers even when their brothers don’t deserve it.
We volunteer for this stuff, most of us bee abuse we love our country. Bergdahl volunteered because he loved Bergdahl. When I retired I loved my country more than when I reported for active duty. I doubt bergdshl can say the same about himself.
So, jail time would have been cool, but I kind of like the thought that a DD and clearing papers leaves Bergdahl with nothing but regrets and a heavy conscious. I truly hope he gets right with God and figures out what it means to be a man, because he blew his shot at being an American Soldier.
There is much wisdom in your comment, Reddevil.
I do hate this sentence because it’s the most “aggravated” case of desertion I have ever seen…and I hate giving the argument to every other deserter, “Okay, so I stayed home from R&R and abandoned my unit in a combat zone. Bergdahl did worse and he did no time…”
That’s not a legal proposition…judges and panels do not have to follow this “precedent”…but I hate the example, especially if he becomes a “celebrity deserter” after the process is over. (I suspect he is going to keep his trap shut at least until the convening authority acts on the sentence.)
In any case there is really nothing to be done about it. We have to leave the process independent, and I can only hope the commander-in-chief doesn’t give him too much “appellate ammo” before the convening authority and the Army court act on the case.
Agree in part, and disagree in part.
The Bergdahl case – like the Garwood case – sets an absolutely horrible precedent. As you noted above, every deserter now has the argument that “What I did wasn’t as bad as Bergdahl or Garwood, and didn’t get anyone killed or injured – and they got no time!” Hell, even Jenkins (the guy who returned after deserting to NK and spending nearly 40 years there) got some time (30 days). Bergdahl and Garwood got nada.
I also agree the military judicial process must remain independent – but I’ve now come to believe it needs some relatively minor changes. My guess is that you think the system is OK as-is, structurally. There I disagree; I think that perhaps it’s time for Congress to make a couple of changes to the UCMJ.
It’s always bothered me that a GCMCA could, on a whim if they so desired, simply say, “Nope – don’t like that sentence. He/she’s a good person. I’m letting them off scot-free; the sentence disapproved in total.” As I recall, a numbered AF commander did exactly that in a recent sexual assault case – and the convicted individual did indeed get off scot-free. Perhaps it’s time to take that option away from convening authorities, and let military appellate courts sort out issues of excessive punishment as well as legal errors.
Yes, I know one of the purposes of military justice is to support military effectiveness. But I fail to see how allowing commanders to summarily throw out a court-martial’s sentence, simply because they don’t like the result or truly like the individual who was convicted, furthers military effectiveness.
Secondly, I’m beginning to believe – strongly – that sentences for many crimes under the UCMJ need to be re-looked, and the UCMJ changed to reflect the result. In particular, IMO quite a number of crimes under the UCMJ absolutely should have mandatory minimum sentences re: confinement. Desertion during wartime and misbehavior before the enemy IMO are two such crimes. There are quite a number of others as well.
Yeah, that would take away some of a military judge’s discretion. So be it. This case is a perfect example of such discretionary authority being abused to the point of perverting justice entirely.
Still: regarding Bergdahl, as you point out there’s not much to be done going forward. And if it’s any consolation, Nance has to look at himself in the mirror every morning – and know full well he let a damned turncoat whose desertion led to multiple friendly deaths and injuries walk, with essentially zero punishment. That’s something, too.
I hope he never gets another good night’s sleep in his life.
Actually, I have a lot of problems with the way military justice is structured now, though not quite along the lines you are discussing. (In the old “justice versus discipline debate”…there are good books about it, like this and good articles like that…I come down on the “Sherman/discipline” side).
Protecting the community from “regular” crimes…such as rape…is not really a military function; and I would rather take that away from military justice completely (under the Articles of War that was the law–stateside, peacetime, courts-martial did not try rape or murder, unless you were out of reach of the civilian courts).
Instead, all the “reforms” this century have been in the direction of “specializing in sex cases and nothing else.” This includes taking powers away from the commander and giving them to lawyers, particularly in sex cases. And most of the attacks on the clemency power, which you’re talking about, have been in the context of sex crimes. I would give those cases to the civilians (with MEJA, even deployed sex/murder cases can be tried in civilian court now), but leave the full range of options to commanders in discipline cases (to include all misdemeanors, since the lines get fuzzy there).
In discipline cases, court-martial as well as Article 15, it’s plain to me that the power of punishment belongs and ought to belong to the commander. He can decide whether to bring the case and he can decide whether to drop the case. As you know, even after pronouncing Article 15 punishment, a commander can remit the punishment or take other options if the soldier has reformed, just as he can suspend the punishment (and the CA can suspend court-martial punishments too, though this is rare).
Since he has the responsibility to discipline the troops, he ought to have the power to decide how much of the punishment the Soldier gets…and if he thinks “the message has been sent; the Soldier has reformed; no more is needed,” he should be able to cancel a sentence completely.
The Bergdahl case distorts this somewhat because it was nationally prominent–but I would not change military justice just for his case.
We’ll have to agree to disagree. I’ve never been completely convinced that a GCMCA should be able to ignore a court-martial verdict that they didn’t like and let the guy/gal convicted off with zero punishment. Why even bother to have courts-martial in the first place, then? Why not just make Article 15’s non-optional, and let a GO Article 15 pronounce any sentence they want – including long-term confinement and the death penalty?
Let me be clear that I’m not advocating that. One person serving as judge/jury/executioner is bothersome to me. Even the best people sometimes make decisions in anger that they regret later – and giving one individual that amount of authority is simply abuse waiting to happen (and eventually some incumbent will abuse that authority). But in effect, since the GCMCA today both decides whether or not to try someone by court-martial and can throw out verdicts he/she doesn’t like, we’ve damn near got that today anyway.
Putting cases of “routine” crimes (rape/sexual assault, murder, etc . . . ) back into the Federal civilian justice system might have merit. However, as I see it that becomes somewhat problematic when the victim is another soldier – and very problematic when a case involves violence against someone performing military duties. Such cases aren’t simply assault/rape/whatever; they also impact military order and discipline. I can’t see how those types of cases could be turned over to the Federal civilian justice system. So making a hard and fast rule that “rapes/murders/assaults” go to Federal civilian courts seems difficult at best, and more likely so problematic as to be impossible.
Finally, I’ll stand by my assessment that some military-specific crimes are simply severe enough that they should have mandatory minimum sentences on conviction – even if that mandatory minimum is as low as the traditional felony “year and a day” of confinement – and that such minimums should be the “floor” to which such a sentence should be reduced absent a reversal of the conviction by a higher military or Federal court. I say that because of the pernicious effect such serious military-specific crimes have on military order and discipline if left unpunished. And I’d say both desertion in wartime, particularly while in an active theater of hostilities, and misbehavior before the enemy (especially misbehavior involving collaboration with the enemy) should be among those military-specific crimes having mandatory minimum sentences.
Why even bother to have courts-martial in the first place, then?
As a check on the commander’s power…if you go back far enough, a king or commander (or even an officer) really could decide to shoot someone on the spot, or order a punishment with no trial…and even up through WWI, a commander who did not like a “not guilty” verdict from a court-martial could send it back for a “do-over.” (The Duke of Wellington occasionally did this.) A court-martial was more like an advisory body to the commander in exercising his powers. But in the last century the power has been more restricted–to prevent a wholly arbitrary punishment when the commander was angry.
So, the ancient default is “the commander can kill whenever he sees a need.” The court-martial idea is “there’s a limit-a reasonably independent tribunal pronounces the maximum punishment, but it’s still the commander who calls the shots about (1) whether to go to CM at all, and (2) how much of that maximum punishment will be executed.”
(Except we’re taking that discretion away in sex cases…which to my mind should just go to the civilians anyway.)
Conceptually, that’s why you don’t get the complete range of constitutional protections…Article 134, for example, would never be allowed in a state criminal code)…because court-martial is not really a judicial function, but an executive one.
And in the end I think leaving maximum flexibility is right because it’s commanders who are responsible for discipline and for the results of indiscipline…so I would give them the maximum powers to enforce it, commensurate with that responsibility.
Finally, I’ll stand by my assessment that some military-specific crimes are simply severe enough that they should have mandatory minimum sentences on conviction…And I’d say both desertion in wartime, particularly while in an active theater of hostilities, and misbehavior before the enemy…should be among those military-specific crimes having mandatory minimum sentences.
A Soldier who overstays his EML/R&R for one day, or one week, or two weeks, or a month (while the unit is deployed) is guilty of desertion with intent to shirk. (The crime Bergdahl pleaded to.) Even if he intends to return to his unit; even if he does return under his own power.
I was glad to prosecute cases like that…but there’s still a “low end” of desertion, even wartime desertion, at least if the war is relatively low intensity…I wouldn’t say all those deserters should get a full year.
(I do like the idea that the prison sentence–even if short–should extend past the end of the deployment…so that the deserter is in jail while everyone else is going home…but even that is a matter of discretion.)
I would still greatly prefer your views to be implemented, as opposed to the trends we are getting now (though obviously I like mine the best).
I agree commanders have far less punitive power today than in the past. What bothers me more is that the current setup IMO gives commanders far too much latitude for “mercy” in serious cases – and we’re starting to see those guilty of truly serious offenses have punishment dramatically reduced (or overturned entirely) by the CA on occasion. It also appears military judges are becoming far more reluctant to “drop the hammer” in cases of serious misconduct.
“Slouching towards Gomorrah?” IMO, you betcha – and that’s the last thing any professional military can afford. The negative effect on military order and discipline from the above won’t be long in coming. If it isn’t here already.
On a different subject: it seems to me that prosecution as AWOL vice desertion might be apropos for many such “overstaying R&R” cases. As I recall, that’s a lesser included offense which can be charged instead. (Charging missing movement could also work, I think. But AWOL would IMO be cleaner.) Alternatively, Congress could create a distinction in the UCMJ between leaving one’s post in-theater (as Bergdahl and Slovik both did) and desertion via overstaying R&R for a short period (say, <30 days), with different maximum punishments - shorter for overstaying R&R, and longer for desertion while in an active theater of hostilities.
But I do have to observe that a "year and a day" minimum for desertion while deployed would ensure that someone who deserted via shirking (e.g., intentionally overstayed R&R) would almost always still be in jail after their unit returned from deployment. (smile)
Nice, and thought-provoking, discussion. Thanks.
How long till he hit’s his book tour for his new masterpiece ” How I survived 5 years in captivity or How I learned to Love A Goat”
Probably do a speaking tour with Chelsea and be the toast of every left wing crazy get together
Maybe- I don’t begrudge dishonorable people their money-making ventures. I can sleep at night and look my son in the eye and tell him about service and sacrifice.
Here, we differ. I do in fact have a problem with a dishonorable person who was convicted of that crime profiting from the crime. In my book, those he injured – directly or indirectly – should have first claim on any financial profit associated with the individual’s criminal actions, including book royalties.
Think “Son of Sam” laws. The SCOTUS has ruled that if they’re narrowly crafted, they’re perfectly legal.
Good point- I tend to honk that the publication of his book would (will?)be accompanied by a shitstorm of a thousand voices telling the real story.
Imagine two movies hitting theaters next Summer: ‘Soldier for Peace: the Bergdahl Story’, about how Bowe single handedly saved Afghanistan and countless lives, collected valuable intel on the Haqqannis, and changed US policy, , and Deserter: The real story about the men and women of the 501st PIR and their mission to save a priveledged douche from his own bad decisions.
Unfortunately, I’m not sure that every US state has a “Son of Sam” law. So even under your scenario, while Bergdahl might be exposed as the Ass he is by the second movie he’d still likely make a mint from the first one. That money IMO should go to those who were injured as the result of his malfeasance – not to Bergdahl.
Conscience. Autocorrect and a tiny keyboard are bad combo
Since commissions come from Congress, they could, I believe, simply write a bill to rescind his, due to “lack of confidence” etc.
You failed to uphold good order and discipline. Out you go.
Doesn’t work that way. They could demand a hearing into military magistrates and make everyone’s life miserable until the CSA asks for his resignation.
Part of the problem here is undue command influence. I said it here several months ago- when candidate Trump made his statements and backed them up as Commander in Chief, it could be interpreted as undue command influence. The judge could have been afraid that a harsh sentence would have the appearance that Trump mandated it and void the whole proceeding. I’ve seen it happen for less. Another reason that Trumps Blackberry should be locked up as tight as The Football.
Bergdahls lawyer said on NPR that he felt it was a factor in the sentencing.
Ya see that’s BS. If Trump had influenced the decision, Bergdahl would have got some jail time. NO JAIL TIME is all Nance.
I’m saying the judge was afraid that a harsh sentence would have the appearance of influence, so he chickened out and went the other way.
Zero time in jail is way below the “harsh sentence” threshold. I could see if he’d sentenced Bergdahl to five years, then you might have a point. But, no time in jail is ALL NANCE.
The “Trump’s fault” canard comes from the Left and the “Never Trump” bunch.
I’m more of a “no more” Trump,and I am far from a lefty.
But I know that from my first experience with a company grade article 15 to the Summary Court and GCM aims at the CoC was careful not to say anything that would influence the outcome. Military justice 101
If anything, you could say that Obama’s attitude towards him was the undue command influence that caused him to be let off without jail time.
There’s your UCI. From the same dirtbag who called Ft Hood “workplace violence”.
Actually, Congress -does- have the power to grant and rescind commissions. Most commissions are at the pleasure of Congress. All of them are on the authority of congress. That grant is subject to revocation. It is a fundamental check and balance.
They could -impeach- either of them, too. That approach might be best, at this point, for the deserter.
the thing we have to remember, and enforce, this that the primary purpose of the UCMJ is the maintenance of good order and discipline, which is necessary to maintain civilian control of the armed forces.
Letting an -admitted- deserter, and admitted misbehavior before the enemy, walk with -no- time served is an -utter- failure to maintain good order.
He should have been -shot-. The this -is- going to happen again. The impact on the -good- troops is -devestating-.
Impeachment requires a crime…and the judge didn’t commit a crime, though I really hate his judgment in this case.
Using the power of Congress to punish a judge for a decision committed to him…would be a serious due process issue. You don’t want to go there. Even if you do want to go there, you don’t want to go there.
Consider, for example, all the hubbub Congress makes about claims about rampant sex assault in the military–to the detriment of the presumption of innocence. I wouldn’t want Congress to start stripping judges and panel members of their commissions if they didn’t find people guilty, or didn’t issue sentences Congress liked.
For good or ill, it’s better to leave these decisions independent. No matter how much it rankles. For the sake of other accused Soldiers, if not for Bergdahl’s sake.
Andrew Johnson was impeached for not doing what congress wanted.
“High crimes and misdemeanors” are defined by Congress. They can certainly, slam dunk certain, impeach a deserter. They could impeach the judge for “failure to maintain good order and discipline in the ranks” .
Impeachment is -wide- open power, intentionally, to check the executive and judicial branches. Much as the presidential pardon is a check, as is supreme court review.
Congress can impeach for almost anything. Penalty is limited to “no government service for you”, so I have yet to hear of any court indicating they cannot.
It is a -vast- power, intended to keep check on the vast power of the government.
Andrew Johnson was impeached for violating a specific statute (the Tenure of Office Act), that already existed at the time he violated it, and it had criminal penalties attached.
Judge Nance has not violated any statute–he has simply pronounced a very ill-considered judgment…and therefore he is not subject to impeachment.
Bowe Bergdahl, the deserter, is not an officeholder or even an officer, and therefore is not subject to impeachment. If Congress passes a bill to punish an individual for a crime…other than the specific officers it can impeach…that is a “bill of attainder” and forbidden by the Constitution.
Impeachment is not a wide-open power…it requires violation of a criminal statute. Otherwise, there would be no requirement of “high crimes or misdemeanors” and it would simply be the American equivalent of a “no-confidence vote” in a Parliamentary system.
Some numbskull of a law professor recently suggested that Mr. Trump could be impeached for his comments on the Bergdahl trial. But the Unlawful Command Influence statute is not a criminal statute, violating it is not a high crime or a misdemeanor (as was violating the Tenure of Office Act), and violations do not subject him (or anyone else) to impeachment.
10 USC 1161(a)(3)?
No, I’m not advocating that. But as far as I know, it does remain valid Federal law today. And I’ve heard rumors (I have no idea whether they’re true or not) that that’s precisely why a certain tall lurchy doofus from Massachusettes refused to allow release of his entire military record a decade plus ago.
If what you say is true then The Prosecution could have introduced Obama’s actions and statements in the other direction. Susan Rice even said he acted bravely and with distinction or something to that affect.
The Judge is a chickenshit too afraid to do his duty because he might be called names.
As for dismissing officers, yes it does work that way. A President can dismiss an officer or remove him from duty until he resigns his commission and if he does not then dismiss him from the service.
10 U.S.C. § 1161(a)Pay attention to (3)
The Manual for Courts-Martial (itself authorized by law) defines “time of war” in its Rules for Court-Martial (RCM) Rule 103 (19) to mean: “a period of war declared by Congress or the factual determination by the President that the existence of hostilities warrants a finding that a ‘time of war’ exists….”
Are we in a “time of war”? United States v. Rivaschivas, 74 M.J. 758 (ACCA 2015), pet. den. 2015 CAAF LEXIS 911 (C.A.A.F., Oct. 15, 2015) says yes.
Also, The SCOTUS Ruling in Hamdan v Rumsfeld has characterized the current conflict as a noninternational armed conflict under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, it appears that our present circumstance would qualify as a “time of war” for purposes of the statutory authority of the President to dismiss officers.
Unusual for a President to intervene, yes. Legal? I think so.
This is an interesting overview of the subject. Make up your own mind
https://sites.duke.edu/lawfire/2016/09/15/can-presidents-fire-senior-military-officers-generally-yesbut-its-complicated/
The Army earned the shame that comes with this trial outcome. They didn’t have the balls to stand tall when this traitor returned to the US and they damn sure didn’t follow through.
Hell, lets train more marxists at West Point, kiss the ring and promote more worthless fucks as Army Generals….looks like Army Col. Jeffery R. Nance is the next asshole to ascend to a one star.
Shame on the perfumed princes of the army.
Bergdahl was shamed by this, not the Army.
Hundreds of Soldiers acted honorably and valorously to save an American. That’s in the finest tradition of the service.
It might have felt good to shoot him, but it would have done no good. This isn’t about revenge.
I won’t defend Nance or the USMA commie- but their actions aren’t an indictment of the entire Army. There are thousands of Soldiers, including generals, that do the right thing every day at great personal risk. I’ve met a lot of GOs, and while a few were idiots and some were assholes, most have lived up to what I expect. I could say the same for NCOs
No. These two brought shame and disgrace to the entire United States Army.
IMO.
Clearly they are an embarrassment, but the Army will go rolling along.
However, they are no more a representative of me or the Army than Manning is, and they cannot take away the actions of guys like Sal Giunta or Dick Winters or the literally millions of Soldiers who stood their post in far worse conditions.
There will be another war, probably sooner than later, and there will be another Bergdahl. But there will be more like Rodger Young and Lew Nixon and Leigh Hester. And thousands of Soldiers that just do their job, stand their post, and go home.
There was a WW 2 song “The Ballad of Rodger Young”. Doubt there will be a ballad of Bowe unless it is part of the movie.
I better not say anything.
OS54, I was brown shoe Army too, and this drives up my blood pressure to levels that are alarming. Back in our day this guy would have actually faced significant jail time. I’ll shut up now before I get profane.
Kiss the UCMJ good-bye. I am ashamed.
So glad my 214 blanket protects me from this bullshit.
the damn muslim savages bought judge nance! this one is sooooo sadddddd and just crazy WRONG!
This removes all doubt.
There is no Justice in this country anymore. There is only Money and Influence peddling.
And that moron in the White House is as useless as mammeries on a boar hog when it comes to being a President.
Old Salt (for the wounds)
All this bulls— about a fair trial! What a waste of money, time and labor. A travesty brought on by the cowardice not only of the accused but all those in the chain of command who have and had no guts or cahones. Talk about command influence! It was all used to provide the government and the armed forces a kick in the ba—. All to avoid poor press for putting this guy away in a closet for life, enduring endless appeals and and for setting forth an example of what happens to cowards and betrayers when caught. Well you fools, you will get the bad press and the appeals forever anyway.
I thought we Americans in the armed forces had some honor, discipline standards and perhaps just a little backbone. Nay, nay I say. Cowardice is incipient at the highest levels and just as a certain other substance flows downhill, this cowardice, lack of honor, absence of fortitude, discipline and right thinking will shortly find its way to the ranks.
Hell if he had plead Not Guilty the court would have probably let him go with full pay and allowances for five years of his captivity and a good conduct medal.
What would have happened to one or all of those fine soldiers had they refused to go search for the turd? It would have been more than a DD and a walk, you can be damned sure and the poor bugger would have been appealing it forever, from Leavenworth.
Leadership, where did it go? Standards, where did they go? Discipline, where is it going? People we have let go many times are filling our prisons. It don’t friggin work, you sorry sacks of mountain oysters! When will all you swampers ever learn?
It is time to drain the swamp in the military too. They have learned their lessons well from the DC swampers and Obama. We have a real problem ‘Houston’ and it ain’t in space its with the rank seekers who filled the void where Obama fired all those fine Generals and others who had the moxey to disagree with his policies.
No where near enough said.
We have serious problems in our military leadership that MUST be addressed. And sooner, rather than later. Regarding the Coward, Traitor, Bowe Bergdahl:
“Obama said Bergdahl was a hero in rose garden.
Trump said he’s a traitor.
Judge disliked Trumps comment.
But Obamas was ok.”
That is not “impartiality”. And it is not a good example for a “non-partisan” officer to set.
President Trump stated fact, Obama stated a lie.
Yes.
Can someone point to a photo of Nance.
I can’t seem to find one.
It’s as if he wears a black hood.
26Limabeans:
This is the best picture I could find. Hope it helps:
http://www.macombdaily.com/article/MD/20130605/NEWS05/130609772
Thanks AnotherPat.
Looks like his ass is on fire.