Here are the two Army war crimes cases Trump is reportedly going to ‘take action’ on

| November 6, 2019

Trump poised to take action in three war crimes cases

Along with reinstating Eddie Gallagher to his Chief Petty Officer rate, President Trump has reportedly decided to act on two more service members who received harsh penalties for actions taken with only seconds to act.

Former 1st Lt. Clint Lorance is serving a 19-year sentence for murder in military prison on Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. He ordered an enlisted soldier to fire on unarmed Afghan motorcyclists in 2012 — an incident that earned Lorance few supporters within his own platoon.

Clint Lorance

Army Green Beret Maj. Matthew Golsteyn is charged with murder in the 2010 death of an alleged Afghan bombmaker.

Matthew Golsteyn

John N. Maher, an attorney representing Lorance, said that he has yet to hear definitively what actions the president would take. Maher is
also chairman of the United American Patriot’s advisory board, which has supported both men as they face trial and file appeals.

Our pal Fox News host Pete Hegseth first broke the news. The rest of the article may be viewed here: Army Times

Tip of the old chapeau to ChipNASA and our ninja for the link.

Category: Afghanistan, Army, F*** Yeah!, Guest Link

Comments (17)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Graybeard says:

    I cannot second guess the men’s actions, or reasoning.

    I am distrustful of the military justice system under the Obama cartel, as well.

    I’m just hoping that the CiC makes wise decisions based on the facts.

    • Ex-PH2 says:

      Ditto. I wasn’t there, didn’t see what happened, and being a cynic, view this as scapegoating.

      • SSG Kane says:

        I wasn’t there either, although I had a chance to serve with someone who was with 1st Lt. Lorance’s platoon that day.

        I’m paraphrasing him, because I don’t remember the exact quote but it went along the lines of “The Lt’s decision to fire on the suspected reconnaissance element rubbed a lot of soldiers the wrong way. He was new to the platoon and morale wasn’t the greatest. It should have been a tough decision to make. There was no clear cut evidence, these guys were bad guys, just a great deal of suspicion. But it wasn’t a hard call for him to make. He seemed eager to make it and there was no deliberation behind it his decision to order his soldiers to fire.”

        He also mentioned that even under the restrictive ROE in place at the time, this would have been a clean shoot. Afghani solders with them had ordered them to stop, US soldiers had lazed them with the green beam, and Afghani soldiers had fired warning shots.

        So, the truth is, I don’t know, I wasn’t there. I just know what I’ve been told and it sounds like it was the right decision made the wrong way.

        • timactual says:

          Nobody on any jury was ever at the scene of the crime, either. They second guess the accused every time.

          I have had at least one platoon leader like that. I suspect he would have been transferred out of the field if he had been there a little longer.

          ” the suspected reconnaissance element”

          Welcome to the wonderful world of “counter insurgency”. *Everyone* is a suspect. Not a good enough reason.

          Hang the Lorance. Pardon Golsteyn.

          “this would have been a clean shoot”

          I doubt it. According to the linked article it was US soldiers who fired warning shots and then Afghan soldiers “gestured for the motorcyclists to leave”.

  2. Martinjmpr says:

    Wasn’t Golestyn the one where the Army decided they didn’t have enough evidence to charge him and then afterwards he ran his mouth in an interview and essentially confessed?

    As I said before, he forgot the first rule of Fight Club.

    • Skippy says:

      Well said
      Big mouths sink ships

    • rgr769 says:

      He was subjected to a lie box at Langley by the CIA, when they interviewed him to recruit him. He decided to tell the truth about the shooting of the IED/bomb maker. He should have lied about it, and nothing could have been done to him. Never ever trust anyone presently connected to the CIA, as they are a totally corrupt org filled with incompetents and rats.

  3. Veritas Omnia Vincit says:

    Negate their convictions, if the military no longer desires their service list them as honorably discharged and leave this chapter behind us.

    Stop with the idiotic ROEs that limit the ability of the military to fight an enemy that blends in and out of a local population.

    Stop pretending that shooting a motorcyclist who may or may not be tomorrow’s convoy bomber is dramatically different than deciding to murder the relatives of an HVT at a family gathering with a drone strike.

    Accept the fact that despite our best efforts we do kill people who were not necessarily in need of killing from time to time and that is an ugly reality of war fighting in these shit holes. Then realize that maybe the best way to avoid such ugliness is to not stay in these shitholes for a couple of decades without any actual plan beyond killing a few people we label “terrorists” or “enemies” today at a cost of tens of thousands of dollars per dead body.

    • Jus Bill says:

      Forget about the cost in dollars; that can be replaced over time. I see the true cost in lives changed by horrific wounds or ended by slow or sudden death. Those cannot be replaced, but are spent far too easily by our “politicians”.

      • Veritas Omnia Vincit says:

        Indeed you are correct, blood and treasure are the true cost of these wars. And the thanks of a grateful nation is fleeting at best.

    • Docduracoat says:

      Very well said!
      As a civilian, I am appalled that Obama personally authorized the drone strike at a family barbecue that killed the 16 year old son of terrorist Awlaki. And a bunch of other people.
      Trump authorized the commando raid that later killed his 8 year old sister to obtain terrorist computers.
      I see no point to endless war.
      Kill our enemies, get out and do punitive raids if they do terrorism to our homeland.
      Killing Americans overseas who are not convicted or even accused of crimes is a war crime itself.

    • timactual says:

      ” despite our best efforts we do kill people who were not necessarily in need of killing from time to time and that is an ugly reality of war fighting in these shit holes. ”

      True enough, but “those shitholes” include Western Europe and the Pacific theater of WWII, also.

      The point is, Lorance didn’t exert any “best efforts”, he intentionally killed unarmed people who were no apparent threat. That’s a no-no in any type of war.

  4. 5th/77th FA says:

    At the risk of being accused of being an echo chamber, I must go on record of agreeing with ALL of the above.

    ROE? Kill them before they kill you or yours.

  5. SFC (R) Blizz says:

    What about the thousands of troops who somehow survived the war without violating the ROE. In the case of Lorance, his own troops turned him in. The dude had been the PL for 2 days. Was he the only guy to be faced with someone approaching them on a motorcycle in a similar situation? I know we all have been frustrated with military justice, but the ROE was the ROE. If I can manage not to violate the ROE, why couldn’t he?

  6. Sapper3307 says:

    The 3 S system
    Shut up