Bergdahl had left his unit before, but returned: sources

Comments (58)

Interesting, so he maybe just a ‘wanderer’ not a ‘deserter’.

But no matter, the intelligent, non-reactionary people of the world(in other words not the current American right wing)will be patient and give it time and let all the facts come out before judging this man.

Jun 05, 2014 5:33pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
EchoTony wrote:

He could not be a deserter. He was gone less than 30 days (soldiers can be administratively declared a deserter if not accounted for after 30 days) and had not been declared such prior to being captured (a commanding officer can declare someone a deserter if there is factual information to support such a charge). As such, he could not be classified as a deserter. AWOL, sure, seems to be a proper description. But using the term deserter is factually and legally wrong.

Jun 05, 2014 6:09pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

“This is not some abstraction. This is not some political football,” Obama said, suggesting Republican criticism of the agreement was partisan.

So why did you bring his parents to the Rose Garden for a photo op before he was even home? It was a boneheaded political move and one that his team is working hard to bury.

@USAPragmatist2

And Jessica Lynch was a hero that single handedly took down the Iraqi Army and Pat Tillman really wasn’t killed by friendly fire. The government and DoD has a nice track record of lying about these things, trying to cover them up, and at least when Bush was President was exposed for their lies. It looks like the media is going to expose the Obama administration as well.

Going AWOL is enough for demotion and possible court marshall. It looks like they are going to sell this as a boy with ADD that liked to take long walks off base by himself without his weapon and just happened to say he was deserting but never was going to desert at all. But no matter, the gullable, swallows anything that the current administration will feed them, people in the world (in other words the current American left wing) will say Obama is a hero and this is certainly different than Reagan trading arms with Iran to get them to have terrorist group in Lebanon to release 3 soldiers they captured after which they captured 3 more to keep those arms rolling in promting a major investigation into the issue and almost cost Reagan removal from office. Reagan bad, Obama good. Republican bad, Democrat good. No partisan hypocrisy here…

Jun 05, 2014 6:55pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
User21 wrote:

USA Prag,

Your recent comment is a joke, and sounds like a well scripted talking point coming from the W-H

two issues here:

did Bergdahl desert his unit?

and did 0bama break the law?

both answers are “yes”

Bergdahl’s own writings, and his units on air accoutns confirm this.

and 0bama broke the 30 day law and he ain’t apologizing for it.

-

this requires a prison sentence for Bergdahl, and an impeachment vote for 0bama,

-

end of matter.

- congress, you now must act and do your duty,

-

USAprag,

I’m sure all u will do is attack me with more irrelevant talking points, etc… go ahead help cememnt my points by trying to talk about no relating things,.

Jun 05, 2014 7:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

This whole controversy is such manufactured BS. We’re officially in the twilight zone. GOP are against the average America & all about protecting the 1% at all costs, even if they have to hurt American soldiers to do it. Disgusting, vile people to bash the return of an American soldier. This reeks beyond all sewage.

Jun 05, 2014 7:09pm EDT  --  Report as abuse

This situation is vile and disgusting. Now, we’re unhappy that our people have been released? Seriously sick.

Jun 05, 2014 7:11pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
AmericanBison wrote:

Deserter or patriot? Regardless how it turns out, this young American man has already been incarcerated for five years. Time to leave him alone.

Jun 05, 2014 7:29pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SixthRomeo wrote:

“Anonymous sources” means that there is someone very dishonest who is active in the military; someone not to be trusted.

Jun 05, 2014 7:44pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SixthRomeo wrote:

More comments from the anti-American faction coming over from the DISQUS groups and the CNN boards, the Communist Party is so very active in the US.

Jun 05, 2014 7:47pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

TheNewWorld wrote:
“Going AWOL is enough for demotion and possible court marshall”

He didn’t go AWOL, which is why the US military promoted him, twice, after he was captured. The US military is not saying he deserted, or that he went AWOL. Only the GOP and its FoxBot sheep are saying that.

What this boils down to is when the US military say one thing, and the GOP say another, then one of them is lying – who do you choose as the liar?

You, of course, choose to believe the GOP without question because that is what you always do, and assume that the US military is lying about Bergdahl without even asking yourself why the hell they would do that.

The rest of us… well, the GOP tells a lot of lies and has every incentive to lie about Bergdahl so they can whine some more about Obama, while the US military has no incentive to lie. The US military is far more convincing than you and your party.

Jun 05, 2014 8:57pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

USAPrag said “be patient and give it time and let all the facts come out before judging this man.”

Exactly right. It’s way too early and not enough facts available yet. Regardless of what this man has done…he was a solider in harms way in a foreign war and was a POW. Those facts are not debatable. While I do not see eye to eye with everything Obama..I agree with him on this on. We can only hope that if we are ever in trouble that User21 isn’t on the jury. If the Republicans had a solid case of Obama breaking the law…they’d be running with that football big time. My initial guess it’s simply more rhetoric. Election year politics.

Jun 05, 2014 8:59pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

There’s a line from the movie “The American President” that I think succinctly defines today’s Republicans….”And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who’s to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections.”

Jun 05, 2014 9:15pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

Bakhtin..well said. Speaking of liars..How about our buddy 4825. Never vets anything. A while back he was blasting Obama for funding Solyndra…really?

Let’s take 4825′s claim regarding Obama and Solyndra for example. Those of us who ACTUALLY understand how our government works and vets facts rather than grunting out some unsubstantiated opinion know this:

1. No President can spend 1 dime of tax payer money without Congressional approval.
2. The funding for the Solyndra loan came from funds authorized by Section 1703 of Title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Legislation heavily influenced by Vice President Dick Cheney passed by a Republican Congress and signed into law by GW Bush. The same legislation that gave billions in subsidies to the richest corporations in the U.S., Big Oil. The loans from this legislation are managed by the Department of Energy.
3. In 2006, with a Republican Congress and a Republican President, the Department of Energy INVITED Solyndra to apply for a new loan. It took 3 years for the loan to be approved.
4. Private investors invested far more money into Solyndra than the U.S. government.
5. So while Solyndra eventually turned out to be a bad bet (hindsight is always 20/20), everyone including Obama, the Republicans and the private sector were involved.

Jun 05, 2014 9:23pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ready2013 wrote:

Bakhtin, you always seem to believe you are the only one with the truth…even when some of your liberal news sources indicate his willful departure. anytime the GOP disagrees with your opinion or questions your administration, you call them liars.

you and your buddies are hiding behind “don’t leave a soldier behind”. I don’t know that this has been an issue with you or your buddies until this became and incident and the GOP questions it (where have you been for the last 4 years).

by questioning the potus decision does not mean those individuals are anti-americans like you and your buddies portray…they just believe in accountability!

As with voter id, gun control, etc. you twist the truth and the statements of others to argue your point. your opinion is the one along party lines.

and it is the potus that has made this a political issue. he didn’t just handle it and move on, he went on to attack republicans, appeared on tv with the parents. he makes everything political issues (showing up at disaster scenes, appearing on stages with parents of gun violence, etc.).

it is the demo’s that have a reason to lie, that is the only way they can stay in office/control. when the truth is being revealed, they will hide behind “what does it matter now” / “what difference does it make now”.

Jun 05, 2014 9:28pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ready2013 wrote:

xyz2055…herein is the problem…”The American President” is a MOVIE…fiction, make believe…

I loved the movie. watched it several times. but it is a movie, the script written by a supporter of the Democratic Party, supporter of Obama, etc. Does anyone see a connection? Reality or delusion.

Jun 05, 2014 9:42pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

ready2013…it was fiction. But fiction often mimics reality. What plan do the Republicans have to fix out problems? “Path to Prosperity”? Which gives high tax cuts to the 1% and corporations, increases Defense spending and only cuts Medicare and Social Security. I think the line for “TAP” is spot on.

Jun 05, 2014 9:52pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ready2013 wrote:

fiction is fiction…

Jun 05, 2014 9:57pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
mrnukem wrote:

The point is the American military does not leave any service folks behind, this was a POW swap, we have been doing POW swaps since the end of the Revolutionary war at our founding and at the end or during every war since, this is no different. We bring our POWs home if we can, it is what we do, any president be he democrat or republican who did not keep that promise to our military folks would be wrong. Like Obama or not on this call he was right, we do not leave our military people behind..ever.

Jun 05, 2014 10:11pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
lkofenglish wrote:

hmmm. lets see here…”soldier looks at odds of 250,000 to one…freaks out.”

I find the alleged crime…from people who have never been there no less…rather interesting.

Can’t say I’m ready to put on the flip flops and backpack to investigate. How about anyone else here?

No?

Wow. There’s a shocker.

Again…leave Bo Bergdahl ALONE. He doesn’t give a RATS ASS what you people think. YOU WEREN’T THERE NOR WILL YOU EVER BE.

Would you like me to explain how I absolutely know this? Or would all who “heroes of heroes” care to explain it for me? (hint,hint: keyword “alone.”)

“Bad guys got set free”? Sorry to hear that. Ummm…”where’s our trillion dollars Mr. CIA guy?” Or did 2008 surprise you all like 2001 surprised the NSA?

We never had these economic problems in World War II. (We had economic solutions actually. Just research “President Truman.”)

According to my reading of the history books World War II got us out of the Depression actually. “When the soldiers came home they couldn’t wait to get back to work.”

And indeed they did. Some of them are still working their butt off even today. “To pay for a war in Afghanistan.”

Can someone explain the difference between “vision” and “insight” here? I mean at what point are we seeing enemies that simply put…exist PURELY in our mind and are CLEARLY fictitious.

Bo Bergdahl is the enemy?

Really?

By all means “we await the Battle Plans for the taking of Idaho.” Bruce Willis was there! Bruce Willis was there!

Bo Bergdahl is hogging the airwaves!
Bo Bergdahl is a traitor!

I’m sorry…where is Bo anyways? Ooooo. “Lets smash this kid to pieces while he’s sitting in a hospital bed”?

It would be insulting for him to even appear on Fox News now. Unless of course the Network President is willing to apologize in person to his Parents…maybe even pay the soldier a visit in the hospital.

“Boy you should see the video feed” instead?

“BUT THE PARENTS WERE JUST DOING IT FOR AIR TIME TOO! THEY WERE JUST DOING IT FOR AIR TIME TOO!”

Yeah..okay. Does anyone here even know the name of the one US Army General who was in charge of pretty much the entirety of the Vietnam war?

That’s right folks…ONE GENERAL. TWELVE YEARS. ONE WAR.

Don’t even know his name…do you.

I had a history Professor (Ronald Spector…I recommend his books quite highly btw) wax on and on about “divided command.”

I found it ironic that he “impaled” Douglas MacCarthur…yet this was a guy who served in Vietnam…under just one Commander. And lost.

My understanding of History is that Douglas MacCarthur accepted the Unconditional Surrender of Imperial Japan in Tokyo Bay on the Battleship Missouri and then “ran Japan” for quite sometime thereafter.

Not bad for a “Divided Command.”

For some reason Professor Spector never mentioned any of that as “part of his thesis.” But again…I highly recommend reading his books.

Jun 05, 2014 10:19pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
SR37212 wrote:

It’s funny how easy it is to know who the white house PR people are by their subject changing evasiveness.

To those people, you definitely have a problem when Mathews and Mika on msnbc are calling you out. But, hey, every job has its occasional problems.

Jun 05, 2014 10:25pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ready2013 wrote:

if he was truly a POW I would agree…to some point. but what about the value of the trade, and who is truly a steward of the US in trading

Jun 05, 2014 10:27pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Alexaisback wrote:

.
.. No American Shall Be Left Behind.
.
Retired U.S. Army Lt. Gen. William “Jerry” Boykin… ” the administration seems to have little regard for a U.S. Marine jailed in Mexico, an American pastor imprisoned in Iran or the Sudanese Christian in custody for her faith along with her two American children. ”
.
“Desertion in combat – and I emphasize in combat, which means you are in a combat zone and routinely engaged with the enemy – is punishable by death,” he said. “That should give you some indication as to how serious this is taken. When a man walks off and leaves his post in combat, he jeopardizes everybody else.”

\.

” scenes of intense jubilation among the Taliban leadership and their supporters. Candies and sweet pastries are being passed around, he says, speaking to TIME via telephone from the Kandahar area. ”

” Those close to the leadership and the detainees are feasting on “whole goats cooked in rice”—a special meal usually reserved for celebrations. “I cannot explain how our people are happy and excited over this unbelievable achievement.” (He too has been known to TIME for several years). “This is a historic moment for us. Today our enemy for the first time officially recognized our status.” ”

“”"”"”" Retired U.S. Army Lt. Gen. William “Jerry” Boykin says Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is clearly a deserter who should never draw a free breath, and President Obama is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors for once again ignoring federal law in pursuit of an administration goal.
“”"”"”"”"”

interesting. 30 day notice law broken
years in policy do not negotiate with terrorist broken.
.
I does not matter that he was a deserter. whether he is red, green, blue, black or white
whether he is republican, democrat, independent, Buddhist, Christian, muslim..
.
breaking the law is breaking the law.
.
.
.

Jun 05, 2014 10:28pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
sabrefencer wrote:

what does going away awol in calif…have to do with deserting to the enemy, during war..Is this more Obama marketing crap???..does he think so little of the military and the rest of us citizens, that he would float this ridiculousness ..Court martial bergdahl…impeach Obama..both need to be held accountable, to the laws of the USA

Jun 05, 2014 10:33pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@Bakhtin

They promoted him twice because he was a POW. The only POW in Afghanistan, and as these come out he may face something between a court marshall, dishonorable discharge, or he might get a might a medal. I remember well the Democrats and all of the media jumping on the Jessica Lynch fiasco as well they should have. I felt sorry for her, she was used as a pawn for political posturing by the Bush administration. No one in her unit ever stated she was a deserter though.

I will prefer to believe the men that served with this person over what the administration and DoD feeds me. I am sure if it was a GOP President you would be saying the exact opposite of what you are now, along with USAPramatist2. Funny how Patriotic Democrats get when the man in office that does the exact same things as GW Bush did, has a (D) after his name.

Jun 05, 2014 10:37pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
TheNewWorld wrote:

@mrnukem

“The point is the American military does not leave any service folks behind, this was a POW swap, we have been doing POW swaps since the end of the Revolutionary war at our founding and at the end or during every war since, this is no different. We bring our POWs home if we can, it is what we do, any president be he democrat or republican who did not keep that promise to our military folks would be wrong. Like Obama or not on this call he was right, we do not leave our military people behind..ever.”

So why was Reagan bring POW’s back a bad thing? When did the Democrats change their mind on these policies. Can you give me an exact date where the US does negotiate with terrorists became ok? In retrospect would you say, “Like Reagan or not on this call he was right, we dont leave our military people behind…ever.”

Why can’t a single Democrat, taking up for Obama, answer me on this?

Jun 05, 2014 10:39pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Loucleve wrote:

great cover for the VA scandal.

and the IRS scandal.

and Benghazi scandal.

yep, very timely. and the bergdals just happened to be in washington! oy, vey!

Jun 05, 2014 10:54pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

ready2013…are you really that obtuse? Is every thing black and white in your fantasy world?

Jun 05, 2014 11:04pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

TheNewWorld…exchanging POW’s has been going on forever. Those 5 at Gitmo were also POWs. Never charged with a crime.

Jun 05, 2014 11:06pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
carnivalchaos wrote:

TheNewWorld: ” Can you give me an exact date where the US does negotiate with terrorists became ok?”

To my knowledge, there hasn’t been a war fought by US military where there haven’t been prisoner swaps. It’s only bad when Obama does it. You people have allowed you hatred for the man to drive you mad. You can’t think straight. All the world’s problems are Obama’s fault. Sadly, what you don’t realize is that you’ve been turned against democracy, the very principles this nation was founded on. We elected him President twice because we wanted him as our President. You simply can’t accept that. All you can see is hatred for Obama. And why? It’s one thing to disagree with a President’s polices, but this President has done nothing to warrant anyone’s hatred. He’s a good, decent, intelligent, hard working, family man who loves his country and is doing his best to serve this country he cares so much about. He’s at least done a reasonably good job during extremely adverse circumstances. You’ve been sold a hot, steaming piece of sh_t and you’ve swallowed it whole. I’m sorry for you, because it doesn’t appear that there’s any coming back for you. So we just have to tolerate your hate-filled, invidious, mindless blather as you drift further and further from reality into a twisted world of hatred for a man you’ve never even met. Sad.

Jun 05, 2014 11:13pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
4825 wrote:

@xyz2055- Try to vet this one:

“President Obama Was Ready To Give Solyndra $500 Million More After Finding Out The Company Was Failing
October 6. 2011″

http://www.judiciaryreport.com/president_obama_was_ready_to_give_solyndra_500_million_more_after_failing.htm

Jun 05, 2014 11:13pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
carnivalchaos wrote:

TheNewWorld: And they didn’t promote him BECAUSE he was a POW. There’s a natural process of promotion that continues with a soldier over time and it applies even when he’s a POW. So if and when he’s released, his rank will be adjusted accordingly. But it’s not BECAUSE he’s a POW.

Jun 05, 2014 11:16pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

TheNewWorld wrote:
“@Bakhtin

They promoted him twice because he was a POW.”

You said at first that “Going AWOL is enough for demotion and possible court marshall”, now you are saying he was a PoW.

You don’t seem to know what you are supposed to be saying.I suggest you read a few more blogs and get your story straight before posting.

TheNewWorld wrote:
“Funny how Patriotic Democrats get when the man in office that does the exact same things as GW Bush did, has a (D) after his name.”

You are the fourth republican poster I have seen saying that (…all Republicans say the same thing…) in the past 2 days.

I guess “claim Obamas success by saying that he is secretly Republican” is the new party line..

From Fox ->”Obama has continued Bush’s failed policies”
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/18/obama-has-continued-bushs-failed-policies/

Jun 05, 2014 11:30pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
xyz2055 wrote:

4825..you try vetting that one. This is an article from a third rate new service that offers zero support for their comment. It doesn’t alter the FACT that Presidents can’t spend 1 dime of taxpayer money without Congressional Approval You have a history of throwing out opinion versus fact. And that’s all that article is.

Jun 05, 2014 11:32pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
comitas7 wrote:

Apparently this shameless “feel-good” moment is not going exactly according to the plans of President Obama and his staff?

Jun 05, 2014 11:49pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
JustProduce wrote:

@xyz2055:
“He is interested in… making you afraid of it and telling you who’s to blame”

You surely meant Obama.

Be afraid of:
- The 1% (which was really 47.2% as of the 2012 count)
- Big banks
- Coal & oil
- Free markets

Blame:
- (First) Bush
- (Then) the Recession
- (Now) Congress

In a poetic sort of way, you are right: ”whatever your particular problem is…”, Obama “is not the least bit interested in solving it.”
Nice, although I already knew it.

Jun 05, 2014 12:32am EDT  --  Report as abuse
pyradius wrote:

ARJTurgot2 posted all that and he still has no idea what he’s talking about. He was captured, making any “absence” against his will at that point. Try again, you surely must be used to failing repeatedly by now.

Jun 06, 2014 2:30am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

@pyradius

What struck me is that ARJTurgot2 wrote: “let the military justice system do its thing on this turkey”

They already did that… and Bergdahl is not a deserter and not AWOL. Only the GOP and FoxBots say that.

The right-wing is just inventing lie after lie on this. Okay… I know politicians lie – though Republicans do it more than most, but lying about an individual who is not even a politician? That is scummy even for the GOP. These people are seriously obnoxious.

Jun 06, 2014 3:58am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Art16 wrote:

Meanwhile….Obama’s Victory Garden of Taliban Dragon’s Teeth will continue to grow and terrorize Afghanistan and the rest of the area for eons to come. Bergdahl is a pawn in a much bigger game, a diversion to distract people away from the truth of the matter.

Jun 06, 2014 7:51am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Overcast451 wrote:

*”responsible for those kids” and ensuring no one was left behind, he said.*

Like you were responsible for the ambassador in Benghazi maybe?

So.. only responsible if it’s good for the political bottom line, I guess.

Jun 06, 2014 8:47am EDT  --  Report as abuse
willich6 wrote:

He is a deserter; a serial deserter.. The Army bears some responsibility for not arresting him previously.. But this doesn’t relieve him of his responsibility to his fellow troops and his country.. The guy deserves to be dis-honorably discharged and court martialed, at the least..
As Susan Rice lied on Sunday again.. He did not serve “with honor and distinction”.. What was she thinking to make such idiotic remark that she had to know she would be called on..

Jun 06, 2014 8:51am EDT  --  Report as abuse
QuidProQuo wrote:

So it’s okay for a solidier go give himself a leave slip without his commanders approval, take a little sightseeing tourist day trip and jaunt back to the base whenever he wants to? It’s okay for one man to be a part of a plattoon on a mission to find Taliban fighters and risk their lives to eradicate these Taliban scums but put his little tourist whims above the safety of his platoon? It’s okay to tell these true soldiers that they volunteered to risk their lives to fight the Taliban but we’re going to let five high level Taliban commanders go in exchange for the wandering soldier who decided he didn’t need his commanders approval to take an Afghanistan tourist break while on duty? The whole thing to me is ugly. No soldier is an island unto himself or has the right to take off whenever he wants just because he feels so inclined to do so. He went AWOL period and that’s a military offense. If every soldier who felt the need for some personal R&R just dropped their gear and went off on a day jaunt, the whole safety and integrity of a plattoon or brigade would be in serious jeopardy. The military has rules and protocols for a reason. We’ll see how far the investigation actually goes in looking for the truth about this soldier’s actions.

Jun 06, 2014 9:49am EDT  --  Report as abuse
gilliardc wrote:

Glad that the Sgt. is doing better and hope that he fully recovers soon. The baggers have proven themselves to be nothing but partisan hypocrites. They were all for bringing this POW home until the president did just that. Now they think that they have an opening to score political points against the president at the expense of the Bergdahl family. Well their hypocrisy has been exposed and we all now know that this has nothing at all to do with Sgt. Bergdahl but everything to do with the bagger party’s Obama Derangement Syndrome.

Jun 06, 2014 10:08am EDT  --  Report as abuse
The_Traveler wrote:

willich6 posted: “He is a deserter; a serial deserter.”

“Serial deserter”? Now there’s an oxymoron for you …

Jun 06, 2014 10:31am EDT  --  Report as abuse
venturen wrote:

talk about sleazing media “He did this once while undergoing military training in California, the sources said on condition of anonymity.”

BIG difference California or on deployment. Is this from the Obama ministry of information. WHAT A PACK OF LAIRS!

Jun 06, 2014 10:46am EDT  --  Report as abuse
tommywinans wrote:

Any parent would be happy a son or daughter was brought home – so I am happy for these parents.

Mr. Bergdahl now has a burden to carry for the balance of his life … men and women gave their lives in search of him … paying forward somehow pales in comparison …

Mr. Obama, sadly, sidestepped laws and protocols to do this. I am ashamed of the behavior so unbecoming a US president, sitting or otherwise. He is not above the law. If he feels that he’d not get support from other elected officials, then he needs to solve THAT problem, and do so legally. Sidestepping every time he hits a legal roadblock, and then sanctimoniously excusing such by saying he’ll offer no apologies for bringing a US Citizen home makes a mockery of his position and our laws.

His claim that previous administrations damaged the international view of the US is disingenuous and patently false.

Jun 06, 2014 11:30am EDT  --  Report as abuse
tommywinans wrote:

Any parent would be happy a son or daughter was brought home – so I am happy for these parents.

Mr. Bergdahl now has a burden to carry for the balance of his life … men and women gave their lives in search of him … paying forward somehow pales in comparison …

Mr. Obama, sadly, sidestepped laws and protocols to do this. I am ashamed of the behavior so unbecoming a US president, sitting or otherwise. He is not above the law. If he feels that he’d not get support from other elected officials, then he needs to solve THAT problem, and do so legally. Sidestepping every time he hits a legal roadblock, and then sanctimoniously excusing such by saying he’ll offer no apologies for bringing a US Citizen home makes a mockery of his position and our laws.

His claim that previous administrations damaged the international view of the US is disingenuous and patently false.

Jun 06, 2014 11:30am EDT  --  Report as abuse
The_Traveler wrote:

tommywinans posted: “Mr. Obama, sadly, sidestepped laws and protocols to do this. I am ashamed of the behavior so unbecoming a US president, sitting or otherwise. He is not above the law. If he feels that he’d not get support from other elected officials, then he needs to solve THAT problem, and do so legally.”

Really. Going to solve 6 years of Republican obstructionism and “feet dragging” just like that? If the President had put this in front of the appropriate committees, a number of which are controlled by Republicans, hence opposed to practically everything Obama wants to do, Bergdahl would still be a POW.

Criminy, when are you people going to wake up? Governments sidestep protocols as a matter of business. If a leader, such as the President, had to stop and get committee approval for everything that needed to be done, the world would grind to a halt.

To quote Robert Copeland: To get something done a committee should consist of no more than three people, two of whom are absent.

There was a small window of opportunity, Obama took it, and the result is an American is out of the hands of our enemy. Period.

Jun 06, 2014 11:59am EDT  --  Report as abuse
BeRealistic wrote:

So The_Traveler, I guess in your esteemed opinion, if you can’t get what you want within the bounds of the law, then get what you want by any means necessary. Something obama has shown over and over again is his belief that laws do not apply to him, that he is above and operates outside of, in this case especially, a law HE signed. We have laws and checks and balances for a reason, so that criminal despots like obama do not run over the American people and enact his will. This was not just a protocol,it was and still is LAW and the committee action has already been completed in making this law and having it signed by obama. Small window of opportunity? For what? You have inside information or what? Initially we were told health issues, but that appears to be a ruse. Seems more like yet another distractor to those of us who like to exercise critical thinking.

Jun 06, 2014 12:09pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
sjfella wrote:

Obama must be loving all these stories since it took the sheeple’s eyes off his traitorous way and onto someone else’s.

Jun 06, 2014 1:09pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

@BeRealistic

Do you think Bergdahl should have been brought back the the USA? Yes or no.

No waffling. No evading. No BS. Just a straight answer – yes or no.

Jun 06, 2014 1:46pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
BeRealistic wrote:

Yes, using legal means

Jun 06, 2014 2:01pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
brotherkenny4 wrote:

He’s not likely too bright. I think that is a requirement of the position. That is why they take young people and not those that have grown up. The brain of the young does not mature until about 26 years. That about 26 years, so some are faster and some are slower and some are really really slow.

Jun 06, 2014 2:19pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Tinbender wrote:

” EchoTony wrote:
He could not be a deserter. He was gone less than 30 days (soldiers can be administratively declared a deserter if not accounted for after 30 days) and had not been declared such prior to being captured (a commanding officer can declare someone a deserter if there is factual information to support such a charge). As such, he could not be classified as a deserter. AWOL, sure, seems to be a proper description. But using the term deserter is factually and legally wrong.”

Close. AWOL is not being where you are supposed to be when you are supposed to be there. Desertion is when a military individual abandons their duty or post without authorization, intending to remain away permanently, usually in a war zone. If he had wandered off before but came back I think the Army would have a hard time proving desertion rather than AWOL. Both are extremely serious in a warzone and, in my unit anyway, a history of wandering away for days probably would have ended in his being “fragged”.

Jun 06, 2014 2:38pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
The_Traveler wrote:

BeRealistic posted: ” … if you can’t get what you want within the bounds of the law, then get what you want by any means necessary.”

Nice try. If that were the case then anarchy would be acceptable, which it isn’t, and that in itself defeats your premise.

BeRealistic posted: “Yes, using legal means.”

Has it been proven that Obama, without a LEGAL doubt, broke the law in getting Bergdahl back? FACT: No, it hasn’t. There are currently speculations on both sides of the “legal fence” but there has been no indictment thus far.

When the NDAA was signed into law in 2014, it included this statement: “The executive branch must have the flexibility to act swiftly in conducting negotiations with foreign countries regarding the circumstances of detainee transfers.” The NDAA was reviewed by both houses of Congress before it was signed.

It appears the President used his constitutional powers under Article II AND within the NDAA to authorize the swap for Bergdahl. And, like Bergdahl and the allegations of “desertion” of which none have been proven thus far, so it is with the President. Until and unless Congress finds sufficient evidence to level charges against Obama, he did his job.

Jun 06, 2014 3:28pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
bryanric wrote:

BeRealistic wrote: Yes, using legal means

Conditions, conditions, conditions. Not a straight answer. It should always be unequivocally yes. This has been the policy of our nation since it’s inception and there is no reason to change it now.

Jun 06, 2014 4:00pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

BeRealistic wrote:
“Yes, using legal means”

As I predicted, you can’t give a straight answer. You can’t say yes or no. You can’t avoid waffling and evading.

Okay… lets run with your evasion. You add the waffle phrase ‘by legal means’, so what do you think Obama should have done – waited 30 days and lost the opportunity? Be specific.

Jun 06, 2014 11:23pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
ready2013 wrote:

Bakhtin,
you have a real problem…
if someone doesn’t fit your beliefs (the demo and libby line) you are critical of them.

you accuse BeRealistic of waffling because he didn’t answer a question you gave him two options (yes or no). all you do is try to set folks up, not trying to get to the real answers. there is another answer at this time…we don’t know – lets get the facts. obviously from your side, all of our administrations actions are legal and reasonable. your pointless and simplistic in your evaluation of any subject. constantly resenting when anyone questions the current administrations decisions. it appears that you and your cronies are so embarrassed that you must attack the other side to keep from facts being revealed.

by the way, you have been one of the worst for responding to questions and taking stuff out of context.

Jun 07, 2014 8:35am EDT  --  Report as abuse
Bakhtin wrote:

ready2013

Of course you support BeRealistic. I asked you the same question, and you too waffled and squirmed and evaded.

We all know why. You dare not say that it would have been better to leave Bergdahl in a cell because that would reveal you as anti-military and anti-American, but if you agree that Obama did the right thing to get Bergdahl out of captivity, you are revealed as whining just for the sake of whining and hence irrelevant.

So… you waffled a load of angry nonsense and BeRealistsic adds contradictory conditions, and runs away when challenged to explains how the two conditions can be reconciled.

My question has pretty well proved that you, and BeRealistic, and in fact the whole GOP, are just whining for the sake of whining. Your party has become *that* irrelevant: the best you can do is whine when you can’t even say directly what you are whining about. What a fantastic contribution. How useful. How would the USA get by without all this pointless whining

Jun 07, 2014 10:18am EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.