Inside the White House's decision to free Bergdahl

Comments (35)
phillyfanatic wrote:

This rotten Quisling Admin. is now not only lying about terrorists, Islamists, but has 8 scandals on its plate where they have put Obama’s legacy higher than the safety of the American public. The Moron Voters and MSM who still support this Admin., simply live in an alternative antiAmerican socialist universe where truth is abandoned . Such amorality does not serve even the moron here well.

Jun 04, 2014 9:58pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
zigo wrote:

The GOP is searching for campaign fodder to replace their “repeal and replace” Obamacare. (They stopped voting on repeal! No one takes them serious on that one any more.)

If you go after Aghanistan, people may remember that Bin Laden got taken out under this president.
If you go after Benghazi, people may remember that Ghaddafi, whose Lockerbie bombing killed more than 180 Americans, got taken out under this president.

Jun 04, 2014 10:38pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
zigo wrote:

The GOP is searching for campaign fodder to replace their “repeal and replace” Obamacare. (They stopped voting on repeal! No one takes them serious on that one any more.)

If you go after Aghanistan, people may remember that Bin Laden got taken out under this president.
If you go after Benghazi, people may remember that Ghaddafi, whose Lockerbie bombing killed more than 180 Americans, got taken out under this president.

Jun 04, 2014 10:38pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
bw222 wrote:

More propaganda from Reuters. It wasn’t Republicans who made this a major issue. It was members of Bergdahl’s unit in Afghanistan that made this such a great issue.

Jun 04, 2014 10:50pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Ralphooo wrote:

It doesn’t matter what he does. Fox and Limbaugh always go after him. It is always possible to find some criticism if that is all you ever do. For some reason, no one holds them accountable for being all critique all the time. In the end it is hard to care what any of them do. It just goes around in circles. I can no longer manage to drum up any enthusiasm to get all riled up about the next act in this endless show.

Jun 04, 2014 11:34pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
sabrefencer wrote:

All they ever wanted was political gain…that is what Obama, Clinton, stand for….they felt, they could use this potential traitor to gain political favor and get away from the VA and other scandals…So, they decided they again, were above the law… just had they had done previously, with the IRS and other criminal actions…Instead, finally, those of us that have listened to propaganda, for the last years, with little gains, finally woke up…releasing those five TOP Taliban KILLERs, for a possible deserter, with men killed looking for him, has reached our core tolerance. Obama should be impeached..he has zero regard for our safety…all he cares about is his time In front of the TV cameras looking at himself…get rid of them all…..they have no regard for our safety….

Jun 04, 2014 11:34pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
notfooled2 wrote:

What do you get when you have a community organizer for CIC? Not much.

Jun 04, 2014 11:43pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Vesparado wrote:

This article is filled with partial truths and outright misstatements! Reuters has fallen to a new low!

Jun 04, 2014 12:13am EDT  --  Report as abuse
treefarm wrote:

I think Obama has taken a very measured, long-term, intelligent, and politically correct decision on this. He made good on his word. The swap may lead to new progress or dialogue. Monitoring the ex-prisoners could even lead us to a gold mine of new drone ops. Its too complex to know how it may play out, but I think it was the right call to make.
The VA mess also has nothing to do with this; it has been a long time in the making and the tipping point was finally reached. Perhaps its a harbinger of a more widespread trend in healthcare?

Jun 05, 2014 1:52am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Universalist wrote:

So how did this prisoner suddenly go from bald and no beard to a hippy in a matter of days???? Compare the pick-up truck photo with the one on the front page here with the President.

Jun 05, 2014 6:57am EDT  --  Report as abuse
rlm328 wrote:

From my readings of the press, bith Democrats as well as the Republicans are upset over this. For once obama has brough about a bipartisan House and Senate. Whether it was the right thing to do or not will be determined in the future. If these 5 rejoin the fight and Americans are killed because of it, does this make him an accessory to murder?

Jun 05, 2014 7:37am EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

Obama has screwed up on most things he has touched. His management skills are lacking to nonexistent. You do not swap five hardened terrorist for one guy that went AWOL and expect the country to be happy about it. What is this guy thinking (never mind, I am not sure he thinks at all). There are now five guys out there with a chip on their shoulder for the US and a whole world that knows if you take a hostage that you will be able to negotiate release for your terrorist buddies. You only need one as the swap is not one for one. Not sure the country can stand two and a half more years of these clowns.

Jun 05, 2014 7:41am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Daleville wrote:

“The deal, however, has caused an uproar among Republicans in Congress.”

In case Steve Holland and Warren Strobel haven’t noticed, there is also an uproar among Democrats in Congress.

How did that fact escape their attention?

Jun 05, 2014 7:53am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Daleville wrote:

“The deal, however, has caused an uproar among Republicans in Congress.”

In case Steve Holland and Warren Strobel haven’t noticed, there is also an uproar among Democrats in Congress.

How did that fact escape their attention?

Jun 05, 2014 7:53am EDT  --  Report as abuse
unionwv wrote:

What Daleville said.

Reuters’ reporters (and editors, apparently) have a distinct tendency to cast all opposition to Obama’s divisive and incompetent actions as “Republican”.

The Latest CNN poll “tells it like it is”: Obama’s approval ratings are collapsing AMONG THE CITIZENRY, most recently among some of his core constituency: the so-called “working class”, and women.

His approval rating remains above 50% only among African-Americans.

Jun 05, 2014 9:06am EDT  --  Report as abuse
pyradius wrote:

4825, quit projecting your own weakness onto the United States. We’ll be just fine for 2.5 years and when another Democrat is elected, we’ll be just fine as well. Now if we could only get rid of the incompetent GOP in Congress, we might actually make some real progress in this country.

Jun 05, 2014 9:12am EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

@pyradius wrote: ” Now if we could only get rid of the incompetent GOP in Congress, we might actually make some real progress in this country.”

You mean like the two years the democrats had both houses and the executive office which were the worst two years for the economy, in 2009 and 2010? Because if that is what you meant then I think we should pass on those democrats running things. Democrats are awful when it comes to running the economy, foreign policy, jobs and just about anything you can come up with except for one thing… they know how to raise your taxes and spend your money.

Jun 05, 2014 9:25am EDT  --  Report as abuse
moonbatpatrol wrote:

“It seemed like the right thing to do.”

That’s ‘cuz Obama doesn’t know the difference between right and wrong.

Jun 05, 2014 9:54am EDT  --  Report as abuse

Never thought I’d see the day when Republicans got upset over a president securing the release of an American POW.

Their hypocrisy and partisan hackery knows no bounds. There is nothing they won’t do to politicize an event to score political points.

Jun 05, 2014 10:01am EDT  --  Report as abuse
SaveRMiddle wrote:

Might as well release the rest of them if the Top 5 Most Dangerous are free. Take the tens of millions of savings and use the Gitmo Resort as a vacation destination for Vets waiting for medical care.

Jun 05, 2014 10:21am EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

@USofRationality- And what makes you believe the president’s timing on this was not politically motivated? Five years he could have made a deal. Ask yourself why now. The answer is obvious, for political purpose only.

Jun 05, 2014 10:23am EDT  --  Report as abuse
DbPolk wrote:

I’m thinking the reaction by the GOP is because they are checker players and just don’t understand the game of chess.

Jun 05, 2014 10:33am EDT  --  Report as abuse
pyradius wrote:

4825, what policies specifically are you referring to, since you appear to think yourself an economist? Do you think the effects of bad policy are immediately felt or do you think there is a lag where the effects might take years to fully manifest? It is amazing is it not, that when the bulk of the wealth keeps going to the top few percent, that the economic recovery is sluggish, wouldn’t you agree? Or are you praying for the rich to trickle down some success to you? Personally I have been gainfully employed throughout all of this.

I find it also strange that you seem to be heavily reliant on the government to fix your economic woes. Perhaps you should be looking to pull yourself up by the bootstraps instead, isn’t that what the cons preach?

Also, as someone solidly in the middle class, my taxes have not in fact gone up, they have gone down.

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/07/tax-facts-lowest-rates-in-30-years/

Jun 05, 2014 10:42am EDT  --  Report as abuse
User21 wrote:

-

The law requires that he be impeached.

All laws must be followed.

Impeachment vote must be held.

Jun 05, 2014 11:03am EDT  --  Report as abuse
pyradius wrote:

User21, very odd is it not that your GOP elected officials in Congress aren’t moving ahead on impeachment.

Perhaps because like the boy who cried wolf, the tired cries of IMPEACH have lost any and all meaning.

Jun 05, 2014 11:31am EDT  --  Report as abuse
pyradius wrote:

I would also add that if Obama has broken so many laws, then that really tells us how terrible the GOP is at governing and enforcing the law. They can’t even figure out how to impeach the president in such conditions? Please remove the entire GOP from office for ‘dereliction of duty’, lol.

Jun 05, 2014 11:38am EDT  --  Report as abuse

User21 wrote:
“The law requires that he be impeached.
All laws must be followed.
Impeachment vote must be held.”

Oh yes, please, impeach the second democratic president in a row on entirely trumped up charges that you’ve been looking for since before the administration even started. Independents will LOVE that. That won’t leave you much time to find something to impeach Biden for, though, and complete the political coup the right has been dreaming of since Election Night 2008.

4825 wrote:
“And what makes you believe the president’s timing on this was not politically motivated?”

So what if he did? I’m not sure what your point is. What are you implicating?

And for consistency’s sake, you can’t play both sides of the fence. Are you upset over securing the release of the only remaining POW in Afghanistan in exchange for 5 prisoners that were going to be released in six months regardless? Or do you agree with what he did but are upset over the timing?

You see, I’m very confused, because last week, Republicans were criticizing Obama for not doing everything in his power to get Bergdahl back into US custody. Now, this week, they are criticizing him for getting Bergdahl back into US custody.

Jun 05, 2014 12:18pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Dehumanist wrote:

The Moron Voters and MSM who still support this Admin., simply live in an alternative antiAmerican socialist universe where truth is abandoned
—————————-
The Moron Voters and FOX who still support this Admin., simply live in an alternative antiAmerican fascist universe where truth is abandoned

Only takes a few word changes and BAM back to the last Presidency

Jun 05, 2014 12:32pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
rlm328 wrote:

To 4825:

This was political by this administration by a long shot, and it has blown up in his face. The present administration had the opportunity to buy this guy out of captivity but chose to cancel the deal and follow a prisoner swap as a way of emptying the prison in Cuba.

If one American dies because of this prisoner swap obama should be tried as accessory to murder.

Jun 05, 2014 1:58pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

rlm328 wrote:
“This was political by this administration by a long shot, and it has blown up in his face. The present administration had the opportunity to buy this guy out of captivity but chose to cancel the deal and follow a prisoner swap as a way of emptying the prison in Cuba.”

The only thing that has blown up is the right’s internal regulator for feigning outrage.

First of all, what details do you know about a chance “buy” back the POW? And, if we HAD paid “bought” the POW back, would republicans not have gotten even more up-in-arms for giving the Taliban money? Furthermore, these 5 prisoners were due to be released in 6 months regardless of any other conditions, so why not let them out early and get our man back? You’d rather pay money for that, or organize a rescue operation that puts more soldiers in harms way?

And it’s funny that you reactionaries are freaking out about this “secret plot” to empty out Gitmo, considering all the criticisms you’ve given Obama for NOT closing down Gitmo.

Just a 24/7 stream of hypocrisy from your lot…

Jun 05, 2014 2:20pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@zigo

We got Bin Laden despite Obama, not because of him. As the CIA stated we were led to Bin Laden through information obtained by torture which Obama was clearly against. I am against torture too, but giving Obama credit for the death of Bin Laden is just dellusional.

Jun 05, 2014 3:04pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

pyradius wrote: “Do you think the effects of bad policy are immediately felt or do you think there is a lag where the effects might take years to fully manifest?”

Well let’s see. If you are liberal then the answer is that there is a lag only until the economy turns around for the good. Then they want to claim credit for it saying it changed because of their policy. If after eight years we are still in a bad economy, the liberals will then claim it was so bad that it will take some more time for their policies to “take hold”. If it turns good 1 year after a liberal leaves office, the liberals claim it was due to their policy from when they were in office. Moral of this story is: liberals are full of Bull $hit when it comes to the economy and should not be allowed to drive the economic bus.

Jun 05, 2014 3:25pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

USofRationality wrote: “You see, I’m very confused,…”

Yes you are. You were the one accusing the GOP of politicizing this and afterwards you post to my point that it is actually Obama doing the politicizing: ” So what if he did? I’m not sure what your point is.” So yes, you are confused.

Jun 05, 2014 3:30pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

4825 wrote:
You were the one accusing the GOP of politicizing this and afterwards you post to my point that it is actually Obama doing the politicizing: ”So what IF he did? I’m not sure what your point is.” So yes, you are confused.

if [if]
conjunction
1.
in case that; granting or supposing that; on condition that;

Jun 05, 2014 4:34pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@USofRationality

Feed us some more of that classic Bill Clinton defense. We didn’t buy it back then either. You said “So what if he did?”, which implies he did so what is the big deal. Pretty soon you will hit us with the what does it matter now line, and it depends on what the meaning of the word “is” is.

But since you only used 1 part of the definition to try and defend your obvious misstep in agreeing that Obama actually did politicize the issue. Which is obvious with the media reports of his responses after his damage control team came up with the narrative they are going to use, and his photo op in the Rose Garden with the guys parents before he even arrived home.

You must have got cut off so I will post the rest of the definitions for you…

if [if] Show IPA
conjunction
1.
in case that; granting or supposing that; on condition that: Sing if you want to. Stay indoors if it rains. I’ll go if you do.
2.
even though: an enthusiastic if small audience.
3.
whether: He asked if I knew Spanish.
4.
(used to introduce an exclamatory phrase): If only Dad could see me now!
5.
when or whenever: If it was raining, we had to play inside.
noun
6.
a supposition; uncertain possibility: The future is full of ifs.
7.
a condition, requirement, or stipulation: There are too many ifs in his agreement.
Idioms
8.
ifs, ands, or buts, reservations, restrictions, or excuses: I want that job finished today, and no ifs, ands, or buts.

Your use of the word if in this case follows definition 2. Even though… So even though he used it as a poltical opportunity, I’m not sure what your point is. Don’t try and pull that BS here, I can be quite the grammar nazi too, even while I make errors allover the place.

But still no reply. Do you think Reagan was right for bringing US soldiers home and the Democrats were wrong for trying to take him out of office for the Iran Contras? Or are you just a hypocrite that can’t admit you are being a tool for the DNC.

Jun 05, 2014 10:53pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.