U.S. general's sex crimes trial delayed indefinitely

Comments (5)
user8192 wrote:

Political persecution? That was obvious from the start to anyone who’s been paying attention to how the Obama administration has been operating since 2009. Obama and crew loathe the military and have been systematically gutting the officer ranks, using minor infractions and trivial social faux pas to fire officers and force resignations. It’s good to see a judge who finally called Obama on his game.

Mar 11, 2014 11:53am EDT  --  Report as abuse
billpr wrote:

“minor infractions and trivial social faux”..

This a-hole already admitted to most of what he is charged with and if you think this is “minor”, you are crazy..

Mar 11, 2014 12:55pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SoutherRican wrote:

Oh, the General will get a deal now, one thing the Army or the Pentagon wants is bad press. When I was in the Army there was not ONE officer around any General that Wasn’t a Kiss up, or Yes Man(Woman), that is the nature of the beast. I personally saw it ALL the time I was a Company Clerk, at that time they were assigned to individual Units. If Obama like the military he would have served his country, as far as I’m concerned, a Private in the today’s Army, is more Qualified to be Commander-In-Chief then our non-military serving President.

Mar 11, 2014 12:56pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SKYDRIFTER wrote:

The sexual assault charges probably would never have been filed in a civilian court. When three years of “he said; she said” is admitted as evidence and testimony; something is badly wrong.

No matter what the prosecution decides, they are going to lose; either to the court or to the media/politics.

It will be interesting to see what happens to the Captain. By all that’s right, she should be tried for the adultery; and at least lose her security clearance in the interim. It will be interesting to see what becomes of her future, after this case is finally closed; regardless of the outcome. In all probability, life is going to get awfully ugly for her – as a “political throw-away.”

Absent a political circus, charging a superior officer, with only flimsy evidence to offer, is a really stupid thing to do.

If the prosecutor has provided her with any “immunity,” that will backfire on the military – and on her.

From the sound of things, a plea deal will be accepted, with minimum sentencing – just to take the heat off the military court system. When this case became “political,” the element of “justice” instantly became an illusion.

Now, the military problem with sexual assault will be guided by this trial. That is bad news for any factual victims. Too many will have to get their justice with a knife or a gun – or just shut up.

Mar 11, 2014 6:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
YONATAN wrote:

It must be nice to be a Republican senator, with a generous salary, and health benefits, and government perks. They can take their time playing “party politics’, while these poor unemployed workers , are left struggling to provide for their families, without unemployment benefits. It’s always easier to look the other way, or to point a finger to blame the victims for their circumstance. The Republican party who prides itself on being “the party for family values”, have not approved an unemployment extension, for several times, since late December. Each time the bill was proposed by the Democrats, the Republican party voted it down in the senate. There are more than two million unemployed workers, with families, who have since had to face eviction, home foreclosures, bankruptcy, and many families are now homeless. How sad in a great country such as ours, where tax payer’s dollars pay for corporate welfare, and Foreign Aid, bank bailouts, and Airline bailouts, but not spent on the average American in need of help. Why is this? Shame on the Republican Party for not having the compassion, and common decency to help their fellow man in need. They will be remembered in the 2016 election I am sure

Mar 12, 2014 1:05am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.