(08-22-2014 11:18 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Don't get Tom talking about anything to do with the legal world.

Shut up. What in the GOA report commented on constitutionality?

Nothing.

(08-22-2014 11:20 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-22-2014 11:18 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Don't get Tom talking about anything to do with the legal world.

Shut up. What in the GOA report commented on constitutionality?

Nothing.

Remember your regulation screw up?

You don't know what you are reading or what it means.

(08-22-2014 11:20 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-22-2014 11:18 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Don't get Tom talking about anything to do with the legal world.

Shut up. What in the GOA report commented on constitutionality?

Nothing.

Want to speak on this now?

Perhaps most of you are too young to remember Iran Contra.

(08-22-2014 11:09 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(08-22-2014 11:05 AM)GrayBeard Wrote:  This still pisses me off. We broke the law to get back a deserter Jihadist sympathizer.

Was he still an American?

That didn't matter to you when you supported Obama drone bombing American citizens, remember? So you just come down on whichever side of the issue defends Obama's position at that time?

(03-25-2015 08:32 PM)BobL Wrote:  Perhaps most of you are too young to remember Iran Contra.

Explain how this impacts whether the Bergdahl swap was conducted legally or not.

(03-25-2015 08:32 PM)BobL Wrote:  Perhaps most of you are too young to remember Iran Contra.

There's a difference in breaking the law to help America compared to breaking the law to harm America.

(03-25-2015 08:32 PM)BobL Wrote:  Perhaps most of you are too young to remember Iran Contra.

Query relevance.

Are you trying to make the point that Iran-Contra was okay, or that the Bergdahl swap wasn't, or that the two are unrelated? Those are kinda your options.

(08-21-2014 05:31 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  For an administration that's led by a constitutional scholar, they sure suck at understanding it.

It's His way of Rewriting It !

Without fail when our President is faced with a decision he of course makes the wrong one. And without fail, his followers continue to defend the indefensible.

(03-26-2015 09:41 AM)k-vegasbuc Wrote:  Without fail when our President is faced with a decision he of course makes the wrong one. And without fail, his followers continue to defend the indefensible.

Obama's litmus test on every issue: what option is best to reduce the gap between the U.S. and the rest of the world?

Obama should be charged with aiding and abetting the enemy. We are still at war with the Taliban. He exchanged the equivalent of 5 Generals in the Taliban for a private that was a deserter. 2 of the 5 Taliban exchanged were involved in the 9-11 attacks. Obama's WH also put extreme pressure, illegal pressure, on the Army legal system to not charge Bergdahl and make this go away.

(03-26-2015 09:49 AM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  Obama should be charged with aiding and abetting the enemy. We are still at war with the Taliban. He exchanged the equivalent of 5 Generals in the Taliban for a private that was a deserter. 2 of the 5 Taliban exchanged were involved in the 9-11 attacks. Obama's WH also put extreme pressure, illegal pressure, on the Army legal system to not charge Bergdahl and make this go away.

That's definitely where it gets interesting. There is no doubt that they had a hand in delaying this news for a considerable time since it was leaked months ago that the Army was going to charge him for desertion. This is no doubt another stain on his abysmal presidency.