Yes, no doubt he should have consulted Congress - despite the fact that the Taliban said they would execute Bergdahl if anything about the negotiations were leaked. And no doubt some idiot Congressman (probably Republican) would blab about it, Bergdahl would have been on video being beheaded and somehow the Republicans would find a way to blame Obama.

Yes, no doubt he should have consulted Congress - despite the fact that the Taliban said they would execute Bergdahl if anything about the negotiations were leaked. And no doubt some idiot Congressman (probably Republican) would blab about it, Bergdahl would have been on video being beheaded and somehow the Republicans would find a way to blame Obama.

So why is Bergdahl being hidden away on a closed military base? Why can't his parents see him, or the media talk to him? The administration claims he forgot how to speak English and that he needs to be reintegrated into western society? What B.S !! No one forgets their language entirely - especially this quickly.

More likely is the possibility he has become such a Taliban supporter that he refuses to speak English.

As for keeping him hidden and muzzled, the more rational explanation is that his anti-American agenda is so foul that the government can't dare show him in public for the disgrace of giving 5 terror leaders to the enemy in exchange for a deserter who apparently hates the country that "rescued" him from the "captors" he sought out.


My son was adopted from a foreign country. He was almost five when he came to the US. In a year, he could not speak his native language.

If the investigation shows that the Administration had reason and the right to act promptly, then that's fine. Rather than condemn and speculate, we need to allow an investigation to determine all the facts.

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
jsteele wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
^^ Just an observation - Conservatives are not the only ones against this exchange. There are plenty of Dems/Liberals speaking out against it. And, there are Conservatives speaking out in support of it. So, go ahead and make this a partisan issue. It is not.


This issue is simply support or oppose, it's bashing Obama for not freeing Bergdahl and then bashing him for freeing Bergdahl. Can you find one individual of any political persuasion that has consistently said, "Bergdahl is a traitor and we should do nothing to free him"? There probably is such a person, but I don't know about him. Rather, I see a lot of conservatives who flip-flopped once Bergdahl was exchanged.


What I see are a lot of people (both Conservative and Liberal-- including Feinstein) who are expressing concern that the President acted unilaterally and did not provide notice to Congress, but I guess we all find exactly what we go looking for...


This is the issue. This is the ONLY issue as far as I am concerned. Bergdahl's character is not at issue at all. Obama's compliance with the law is the only question. Have an investigation and a hearing and release the facts. I think we can all get on board with that.



Yes, no doubt he should have consulted Congress - despite the fact that the Taliban said they would execute Bergdahl if anything about the negotiations were leaked. And no doubt some idiot Congressman (probably Republican) would blab about it, Bergdahl would have been on video being beheaded and somehow the Republicans would find a way to blame Obama.

Verily, you people are idiots.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Just an observation - Conservatives are not the only ones against this exchange. There are plenty of Dems/Liberals speaking out against it. And, there are Conservatives speaking out in support of it. So, go ahead and make this a partisan issue. It is not.

This issue is simply support or oppose, it's bashing Obama for not freeing Bergdahl and then bashing him for freeing Bergdahl. Can you find one individual of any political persuasion that has consistently said, "Bergdahl is a traitor and we should do nothing to free him"? There probably is such a person, but I don't know about him. Rather, I see a lot of conservatives who flip-flopped once Bergdahl was exchanged.

What I see are a lot of people (both Conservative and Liberal-- including Feinstein) who are expressing concern that the President acted unilaterally and did not provide notice to Congress, but I guess we all find exactly what we go looking for...

This is the issue. This is the ONLY issue as far as I am concerned. Bergdahl's character is not at issue at all. Obama's compliance with the law is the only question. Have an investigation and a hearing and release the facts. I think we can all get on board with that.

Yes, no doubt he should have consulted Congress - despite the fact that the Taliban said they would execute Bergdahl if anything about the negotiations were leaked. And no doubt some idiot Congressman (probably Republican) would blab about it, Bergdahl would have been on video being beheaded and somehow the Republicans would find a way to blame Obama.

Verily, you people are idiots.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Just an observation - Conservatives are not the only ones against this exchange. There are plenty of Dems/Liberals speaking out against it. And, there are Conservatives speaking out in support of it. So, go ahead and make this a partisan issue. It is not.

This issue is simply support or oppose, it's bashing Obama for not freeing Bergdahl and then bashing him for freeing Bergdahl. Can you find one individual of any political persuasion that has consistently said, "Bergdahl is a traitor and we should do nothing to free him"? There probably is such a person, but I don't know about him. Rather, I see a lot of conservatives who flip-flopped once Bergdahl was exchanged.

What I see are a lot of people (both Conservative and Liberal-- including Feinstein) who are expressing concern that the President acted unilaterally and did not provide notice to Congress, but I guess we all find exactly what we go looking for...

This is the issue. This is the ONLY issue as far as I am concerned. Bergdahl's character is not at issue at all. Obama's compliance with the law is the only question. Have an investigation and a hearing and release the facts. I think we can all get on board with that.

Then why not hear directly from Bergdahl? So many questions could be answered that way.

If he had a dispute with America, let him air it. If he renounced his citizenship or declared jihad, let him say so. And let him explain what happened on the day and weeks following his desertion.

Why is the administration hiding him? Let the man speak.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Just an observation - Conservatives are not the only ones against this exchange. There are plenty of Dems/Liberals speaking out against it. And, there are Conservatives speaking out in support of it. So, go ahead and make this a partisan issue. It is not.

This issue is simply support or oppose, it's bashing Obama for not freeing Bergdahl and then bashing him for freeing Bergdahl. Can you find one individual of any political persuasion that has consistently said, "Bergdahl is a traitor and we should do nothing to free him"? There probably is such a person, but I don't know about him. Rather, I see a lot of conservatives who flip-flopped once Bergdahl was exchanged.

What I see are a lot of people (both Conservative and Liberal-- including Feinstein) who are expressing concern that the President acted unilaterally and did not provide notice to Congress, but I guess we all find exactly what we go looking for...

This is the issue. This is the ONLY issue as far as I am concerned. Bergdahl's character is not at issue at all. Obama's compliance with the law is the only question. Have an investigation and a hearing and release the facts. I think we can all get on board with that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Just an observation - Conservatives are not the only ones against this exchange. There are plenty of Dems/Liberals speaking out against it. And, there are Conservatives speaking out in support of it. So, go ahead and make this a partisan issue. It is not.

This issue is simply support or oppose, it's bashing Obama for not freeing Bergdahl and then bashing him for freeing Bergdahl. Can you find one individual of any political persuasion that has consistently said, "Bergdahl is a traitor and we should do nothing to free him"? There probably is such a person, but I don't know about him. Rather, I see a lot of conservatives who flip-flopped once Bergdahl was exchanged.

What I see are a lot of people (both Conservative and Liberal-- including Feinstein) who are expressing concern that the President acted unilaterally and did not provide notice to Congress, but I guess we all find exactly what we go looking for...

This is the issue. This is the ONLY issue as far as I am concerned. Bergdahl's character is not at issue at all. Obama's compliance with the law is the only question. Have an investigation and a hearing and release the facts. I think we can all get on board with that.

Yes, no doubt he should have consulted Congress - despite the fact that the Taliban said they would execute Bergdahl if anything about the negotiations were leaked. And no doubt some idiot Congressman (probably Republican) would blab about it, Bergdahl would have been on video being beheaded and somehow the Republicans would find a way to blame Obama.

Verily, you people are idiots.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ Just an observation - Conservatives are not the only ones against this exchange. There are plenty of Dems/Liberals speaking out against it. And, there are Conservatives speaking out in support of it. So, go ahead and make this a partisan issue. It is not.

This issue is simply support or oppose, it's bashing Obama for not freeing Bergdahl and then bashing him for freeing Bergdahl. Can you find one individual of any political persuasion that has consistently said, "Bergdahl is a traitor and we should do nothing to free him"? There probably is such a person, but I don't know about him. Rather, I see a lot of conservatives who flip-flopped once Bergdahl was exchanged.

What I see are a lot of people (both Conservative and Liberal-- including Feinstein) who are expressing concern that the President acted unilaterally and did not provide notice to Congress, but I guess we all find exactly what we go looking for...

This is the issue. This is the ONLY issue as far as I am concerned. Bergdahl's character is not at issue at all. Obama's compliance with the law is the only question. Have an investigation and a hearing and release the facts. I think we can all get on board with that.

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing a 5 year losing native language to a 28 year old losing native language is indeed apples to oranges.
Adoptive Mother

From what I've read, Bergdahl didn't completely lose use of English. It sounds like he has a number of issues with which to deal and language is just one of them. Arguing this point is a waste of time.

Anonymous wrote:Comparing a 5 year losing native language to a 28 year old losing native language is indeed apples to oranges.
Adoptive Mother

Anonymous wrote:

My son was adopted from a foreign country. He was almost five when he came to the US. In a year, he could not speak his native language.

You seriously aren't comparing a 5 year old losing his native tongue after a year and only have been talking less than 4 years with an adult (speaking in excess of 20 years) forgetting his native tongue. Apples to oranges.

Then they need to stop advertising as such. Come join the Army and see thw world. It's not just a job, it's an adventure. Other than that, I agree, as a free-thinker, he should not have joined the military. And I don't know if he is a deserter or not, but the military code is leave no servicemember behind. Let the court martial figure out the legalities.