Bowe Bergdahl Asks Barack Obama for Presidential Pardon

WILL OBAMA GO THRU WITH A TREASONOUS ACT LIKE GIVING BEGDAHL A PARDON?

Sgt. Bowe Bergdah has asked President Obama to pardon him before leaving the White House. Will Obama provide such a pardon to a traitor? As reported at the NY Times, the request is a pre-emptive pardon that would avert Sergeant Bergdahl’s court-martial trial on charges of desertion and misbehavior before the enemy that endangered fellow soldiers. The trial is scheduled to begin on April 18. If found guilty, Bergdahl would probably face life in prison. As opined at the Gateway Pundit, “many of the men who served with Bowe Bergdahl have described him as a deserter but that didn’t stop Obama from trading multiple foreign Taliban terrorists for him a few years ago.” But who would really be surprised if Obama, the divider in chief did such a thing? One person who would not is President-elect Donald Trump. He was highly critical of Bergdahl on the campaign trail, calling him a “dirty, rotten traitor”.

Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl Credit U.S. Army

A source told Fox News that Bergdahl wrote a letter to Obama thanking him for rescuing him in 2014 and trading him for the Guantanamo Bay detainees.

White House and Justice Department officials also told the New York Times that Bergdahl submitted several copies of a clemency application that were sent to the Pentagon, the Justice Department and the White House immediately after the election.

The pardon would avert Bergdahl’s court-martial trial, which is slated to begin in April. He faces charges of desertion and misbehavior before the enemy, endangering fellow soldiers.

Barack Obama actually brought this deserter to the White House and made it a WH photo-op

obama_bergdahl

Remember when Sergeant Bergdahl was released in May 2014 and Obama appeared alongside his parents in the Rose Garden. The national security adviser, Susan E. Rice, said he had served with “honor and distinction.” Yet another thing Obama and his minions got 100% incorrect and on the wrong side of the American people. It will be a breath of fresh air to rid ourselves of the Obama administration once and for all.

This is yet another reason why America voted from Trump in an electoral landslide, for actions like the current administration did with the likes of Bowe Bergdahl. America agreed with Donald Trump as to what should happen to the likes of this traitor. Take a look and listen below.

Trump: Bergdahl a “Dirty, Rotten Traitor”

Trump on Bergdhal

 

Barack Obama Eating Crow Over Donald Trump Carrier Deal … Obama Previously Mocked Trump, “Well, how — what — how exactly are you going to negotiate that? What magic wand do you have?” (VIDEO)

AMERICA, THIS IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A DO NOTHING FAILURE PRESIDENT AND ONE THAT DOES WHAT HE SAYS

Barack Obama and Democrats are eating some major league crow after president-elect Donald Trump came true on his election promise to help keep Carrier and nearly one thousand American jobs from going to Mexico. FLASHBACK … it was not that long ago that Obama was asked about, then GOP presidential candidate Trump, the promise to help Carrier workers keep their jobs at a Town Hall meeting. Obama was quick to be sarcastic and mock Trump. Guess what Obama, Trump does have a magic wand after all. Its called knowing business and the art of the deal. Obama has nothing but egg on his face as Trump came through on his promise. This is my Obama was an epic failure and Trump is already a success.

“ … when somebody says, like the person you just mentioned who I’m not going to advertise for, that he’s going to bring all these jobs back, well how exactly are you going to do that? What are you going to do?”

“There’s — there’s no answer to it,” Obama said.

“He just says, ‘Well, I’m going to negotiate a better deal.’ Well, how — what — how exactly are you going to negotiate that? What magic wand do you have? And usually, the answer is he doesn’t have an answer,” he continued.

Now we have Democrats whining that jobs were saved over a $7 million tax incentive. Seriously, $7 million? After Obama wasted billions of dollars on a BS stimulus plan? In the grand scheme of things, $7 million to save 1000 jobs is quite an accomplishment. See Obama’s failed porkulous plan and his cash give aways to Solyndra and the other failed green energy companies to see what a bad deal looks like.  Keep hating on deals like this Democrats, the American workers, many of these folks union employees, are very thankful to Trump and will vote for him again. Unlike how Obama did nothing and allowed these companies and the jobs to leave for third world countries. Note to Democrats, this is what Making America Great Again looks like.

Barack Obama Has Tense Exchange With CNN’s Jake Tapper Over why he won’t say ‘radical Islamic terrorism’ After Asked By Gold Star Mom

HOW COULD AMERICA EVER ELECT A PRESIDENT TWICE THAT WAS SO WRONG ON TERRORISM …

Watch the video below and listen to Barack Obama’s twisted logic in answering the question as to why he does not use the term, ‘radical Islamic terrorism.’ It sounds more like he cares about not offending Muslims than he does identifying who our enemy is. By some how not saying radical Islamic terrorists that means that not all Muslimes are terrorists. Really? Actually, by stating our enemy is radical Islamic terrorists differentiates radical Islam from the rest of Islam. Then at the 5:50 mark of the video, Jake Tapper confronts Obama and it gets testy. The laugh line has to be when Obama says, I don’t want to interject partisan politics in this.” Are you kidding, that’s all Obama has done since he took office is to play partisan politics and divide this country.

The only thing Obama has unified anyone about was the bi-partisan over-ride of his veto on the 9-11 lawsuit bill.

Business Insider:

President Barack Obama sparred with CNN host Jake Tapper on Wednesday night in a tense exchange over Obama’s refusal to use the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism.”

During a CNN town-hall event focusing on the US military, Gold Star mother Tina Houchins asked Obama why he wouldn’t use the term.

“The truth of the matter is that this is an issue that has been sort of manufactured, because there is no doubt, and I’ve said repeatedly that where we see terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda or ISIL, they have perverted and distorted and tried to claim the mantle of Islam for an excuse, for basically barbarism and death,” Obama said.

“These are people who kill children, kill Muslims, take sex slaves — there’s no religious rationale that would justify in any way any of the things that they do,” he added.

Obama later seemed to allude to Trump as he continued to answer Houchins’ question.

“I’ll just be honest with you: The dangers where we get loose in this language, particularly when a president or people aspiring to become president get loose with this language, you can see in some of the language that we use, in talking about Muslim-Americans here and the notion that somehow we’d start having religious tests in who can come in the country and who’s investigated and whether the Bill of Rights applies to them in the same way,” Obama said.

Trump has often said while campaigning that the US should administer some sort of test to immigrants to determine whether they have terrorist sympathies.

Tapper interjected to point out the allusion to Trump, and the exchange between him and Obama grew tense.

Here’s how it played out:

Tapper: Just to interject …

Obama: Yes?

Tapper: You were clearly talking about the Republican nominee, Donald Trump, just then. You think his …

Obama: No, I wasn’t. But …

Tapper: You weren’t?

Obama: No, I …

Tapper: Well, you just said …

Obama: I would just say this, Jake, because …

Tapper: … aspiring to this office …

Obama: No, but it’s not unique to the Republican nominee. And again, I’m trying to be careful. We’re on a military base. I don’t want to insert partisan politics into this. I think that there have been a number of public figures where you start hearing commentary that is dangerous because what it starts doing is it starts dividing us up as Americans.

9/11 Moment Of Silence at Pentagon Moved Up Because Obama Was Impatient

OBAMA MOVES UP MOMENT OF SILENCE AT PENTAGON ON 9-11, WHATS THE MATTER DID HE HAVE AN EARLY TEE TIME?

UNREAL, the moment of silence was originally slotted to take place at 9:37 AM, the time at which the Pentagon was attacked on September 11, 2001, but ended up taking place a few minutes early. The Daily Caller is reporting that this took place in order to accommodate a restless President Barack Obama. Are you kissing me? Obama, who has never been on time for any event, suddenly is impatient and moves up the moment of silence of a day meant to remember and honor the fallen on 9-11.This is just yet another example in a long line of them during Obama’s presidency where he thinks he is more entitled and important than “We the People.”

Because its all about him

Obama_sad

A moment of silence remembering the September 11 victims at a Pentagon memorial service began early in order to accommodate a restless President Obama, a Department of Defense official told The Daily Caller.

A source close to the situation told TheDC that Obama arrived early to the memorial service — which took place at the Pentagon — and wanted to get things started early.

A Department of Defense official confirmed that the moment of silence was moved up a few minutes and that Obama was the one who made the decision, saying the president “moved early.”

Powerline opines and I could not agree more, In remarks delivered after the moment of silence was over, Obama stated:

The question before us, as always, is: How do we preserve the legacy of those we lost? How do we live up to their example? And how do we keep their spirit alive in our own hearts?

It seems like little to ask that a moment of silence scheduled for the time the Pentagon was hit be observed at that time. If there’s a compelling reason to move the observance up, so be it.

But if, as reported, Obama moved up the moment of silence because he was restless, I say he did not “live up to the example” of “those we lost.”

Barack Obama’s $400 Million Ransom Payment to Iran to Free Hostages

WHAT, YOU THOUGHT IRAN RELEASED THE AMERICAN HOSTAGES BECAUSE THEY RESPECTED AND FEARED OBAMA?

The WSJ is reporting that the Obama administration sent $400 million to Iran as Americans were freed from the terror state. However, Barack Hussein Obama claims that there was no quid pro quo, and it was not a ransom as critics have charged. Oh, of course it was just a coincidence. REALLY? And if you believe that one I have a private email server to sell you from Hillary Clinton’s bathroom that did not contain top secret emails. Interestingly enough, the Iranian press reports have quoted senior Iranian defense officials describing the cash as a ransom payment. How sad has it become in America when one believes the Iranian media over the President of the United States?

Obama money

The Obama administration secretly organized an airlift of $400 million worth of cash to Iran that coincided with the January release of four Americans detained in Tehran, according to U.S. and European officials and congressional staff briefed on the operation afterward.

Wooden pallets stacked with euros, Swiss francs and other currencies were flown into Iran on an unmarked cargo plane, according to these officials. The U.S. procured the money from the central banks of the Netherlands and Switzerland, they said.

The money represented the first installment of a $1.7 billion settlement the Obama administration reached with Iran to resolve a decades-old dispute over a failed arms deal signed just before the 1979 fall of Iran’s last monarch, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.

Senior U.S. officials denied any link between the payment and the prisoner exchange. They say the way the various strands came together simultaneously was coincidental, not the result of any quid pro quo.

“As we’ve made clear, the negotiations over the settlement of an outstanding claim…were completely separate from the discussions about returning our American citizens home,” State Department spokesman John Kirby said. “Not only were the two negotiations separate, they were conducted by different teams on each side, including, in the case of The Hague claims, by technical experts involved in these negotiations for many years.”

But U.S. officials also acknowledge that Iranian negotiators on the prisoner exchange said they wanted the cash to show they had gained something tangible.

Powerline points out some of the specifics of the Obama ransom for hostages deal with Iran.

(1) It was indeed a ransom payment – negotiators originally established a formula of people for people: American nationals held by Iran for Iranian nationals held by America. But then the Iranians started demanding billions of dollars as well. Iranian officials later bragged they coerced the ransom out of U.S. diplomates —

The U.S. and Iran entered into secret negotiations to secure the release of Americans imprisoned in Iran in November 2014… The discussions… initially focused solely on a formula whereby Iran would swap the Americans detained in Tehran for Iranian nationals held in U.S. jails… But around Christmas, the discussions dovetailed with… the old arms deal. The Iranians were demanding the return of $400 million… They also wanted billions of dollars as interest accrued since then… a report by an Iranian news site close to the Revolutionary Guard, the Tasnim agency, said the cash arrived in Tehran’s Mehrabad airport on the same day the Americans departed. Revolutionary Guard commanders boasted at the time that the Americans had succumbed to Iranian pressure. “Taking this much money back was in return for the release of the American spies,” said Gen. Mohammad Reza Naghdi, commander of the Guard’s Basij militia, on state media.

(2) The administration hid the details from Congress – Lawmakers have been pressing the administration for six months to provide more details about how and where the money went, among other things because Iran has been transferring money for military purposes. They’ve made little progress —

The Obama administration has refused to disclose how it paid any of the $1.7 billion, despite congressional queries, outside of saying that it wasn’t paid in dollars. Lawmakers have expressed concern that the cash would be used by Iran to fund regional allies, including the Assad regime in Syria and the Lebanese militia Hezbollah, which the U.S. designates as a terrorist organization. The U.S. and United Nations believe Tehran is subsidizing the Assad regime’s war in Syria through cash and energy shipments. Iran has acknowledged providing both financial and military aid to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and deploying Iranian soldiers there.

← Previous PageNext Page →

Support Scared Monkeys! make a donation.

 
 
  • NEWS (breaking news alerts or news tips)
  • Red (comments)
  • Dugga (technical issues)
  • Dana (radio show comments)
  • Klaasend (blog and forum issues)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Close
E-mail It