Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: RinaseaofDs

Thanks for your answer and thoughts on this. No problem looking up your previous answer- I can do a quick search of your posts :)

In my brief chats today with a couple of soldiers they tell me the order to rescind can only have come from the very top...


273 posted on 07/15/2009 12:49:48 PM PDT by SE Mom (Proud mom of an Iraq war combat vet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 259 | View Replies ]


To: SE Mom

Ditto, thats what I have been told.


276 posted on 07/15/2009 12:56:57 PM PDT by Danae (Conservative does not equal Republican. Conservative does not compromise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies ]

To: SE Mom

“In my brief chats today with a couple of soldiers they tell me the order to rescind can only have come from the very top...”

Not necessarily. I thought about this, and normally what you’d do is stick the Major into pre-trial confinement. You set a date for trial, and then the Army asked the WH for the documents. WH replies, “No problem on that request. We’ll have those documents to you right away.”

At that point, you can keep the major in the brig nearly indefinitely. You can keep filing motions, but the WH continues the speculation on whether the docs exist or not.

That didn’t happen.

What happened was the request was made by the Army, the request was rejected, and the Army decided to rescind the order, which they can do.

Legally, the Army knows what effect that’s going to have. Pretty tough for the MSM to ignore what amounts to legal desertion by anybody that trys this tactic.

The WH responded by making sure the Major lost his job (that was a political, not military move, and if you read Taitz’s blog post on the facts, you can see that pretty clearly).

At this point, my guess is that the military is forcing the issue with a completely valid military legal argument, and promising more chaos if they don’t take responsibility for making the issue a political one.

What’s deft about this is that the Army can defend their actions as being the most politically quiet one they have (You can see the ‘Free Major Cook’ t-shirts being a problem if they went with the pre-trial confinement approach).

Somebody smart has been stacking gradual political, and now military pressure on Obama to answer these questions.

The WH getting Cook fired as a military contractor was a rookie response in my opinion. What does it buy the WH? It makes Cook look more and more like a martyr.

There isn’t a moonbat in the world that will take the position that even though Cook was enthusiastic about deploying, he should NOT have questioned the legality and did it anyway. It means that Nuremberg and the Calley trial would be moot, and you’d open up the possibility of other Mi Lai’s. Mi Lai was a big liberal victory.

There isn’t a liberal in the world that doesn’t think its a ploy, but there again, none will make the argument that he should have blindly followed the order and taken his post.

I think this may have come from the top, but no way would Obama shiv himself like this. Press has pretty much GOT to talk about it now.


282 posted on 07/15/2009 1:12:19 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 273 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson