The release of Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, the only American soldier held captive in Afghanistan, has been a source of celebration but also concern in Washington. While the country has long insisted that it would not negotiate with terrorists, it seems like it has been doing precisely that for years in working out a trade that ultimately led to the release of five Taliban leaders. More importantly, federal law requires notice to Congress some 30 days before a release of a detainee from Guantanamo Bay — another federal provision that the White House appears to have simply ignored in a unilateral act. I am scheduled to discuss the case on CNN on Monday morning.
The circumstances of Bergdahl’s capture remain suspicious. He claimed in a videotape as a captive that he lagged behind a patrol and was captured. A friend who works closely with the military in Afghanistan says that that is highly unlikely given the protocols used on patrols. Fellow soldiers claim that Bergdahl was a deserter. My friend says that he was told that Bergdahl walked away from this base. He is quoted as saying that he was ashamed of being an American and disenchanted with the mission in Afghanistan. He was listed as missing in June 2009, three days after reportedly sending his parents an e-mail stating “I am ashamed to be an American” and “The horror that is America is disgusting.” Those sources say that he voluntarily left the mountain base. Worse yet, American soldiers were killed reportedly looking for Bergdahl, though there is still uncertainty about that claim.
That could put the President in a rough position. He declared that
“Sergeant Bergdahl has missed birthdays, and holidays and simple moments with family and friends which all of us take for granted. But while Bowe was gone, he was never forgotten”— not by his family or his hometown in Idaho, or the military. “And he wasn’t forgotten by his country, because the United States of America does not ever leave our men and women in uniform behind.”
If Bergdahl is a deserter, there will be pressure to charge him, but the trade may become even less popular if he is sitting in a brig. [Update: when I appeared on CNN this morning, the network aired the following statement from one of his former platoon members, Sgt. Matt Vierkant: “I was pissed off then and I am even more so now with everything going on. Bowe Bergdahl deserted during a time of war and his fellow Americans lost their lives searching for him.”]
Critics are likely to demand answers about his actions and alleged dissection while detailing the threat of these five leaders as well as their alleged Al-Qaeda connections. On the other hand, the White House is insisting that, with troops leaving the country, they needed to get him out and had no choice but to relent to the demand for a trade. The White House could also argue that the status of these Gitmo detainees remains a problem and the country cannot hold them indefinitely — so that these five would have had to be returned to Afghanistan eventually unless we were to use the widely ridiculed tribunal system.
Then there is the question of negotiating with terrorists and failing to comply with federal law.
Congressional leaders have warned that such trades only increase the incentive to capture U.S. soldiers and citizens around the world. The Taliban do not represent a nation state and many accuse them of regularly engaging in acts that would be deemed terrorism by the United States. The Obama Administration may be in the curious position of now insisting that they are freedom fighters or a legitimate military force rather than terrorists.
The federal law adds the obligation to notify congressional committees at least 30 days before making any transfers of prisoners with explanations of the conditions and arrangements for such releases. No such notice was given. While President Obama denounced signing statements by George W. Bush as a Senator and as a candidate for the presidency, he issued such a signing statement when the law was passed to say that the condition was unconstitutional as an infringement upon his powers as commander in chief. He appears in clear violation of federal law. You may recall then candidate Barack Obama promising “I taught the Constitution for 10 years, I believe in the Constitution and I will obey the Constitution the of the United States. We’re not gonna use signing statements as a way to do an end-run around Congress, alright?”
I recently testified (here and here and here) and wrote a column on President Obama’s increasing circumvention of Congress in negating or suspending U.S. laws.
It is notable that Obama is again claiming near absolute executive power (and augmenting this claim with the use of the controversial signing statement tactic). He is claiming that Congress cannot limit — even with a notice requirement — his control over detainees at Gitmo. It is another glimpse into what I once called the “uber presidency” that has emerged under the last two presidents.
The five men released are considered highly dangerous. Khirullah Said Wali Khairkhwa and Abdul Haq Wasiq are classified as a “high risk” to the United States. Two others, Mohammad Fazl and Mullah Norullah Mori, were present during the 2001 prison riot at Mazar-e Sharif when CIA paramilitary officer Johnny Micheal Spann was killed. Fazl is thought to be the Taliban “army chief of staff”) and a longtime al-Qaeda ally. Wasiq reportedly helped train al-Qaeda. Mullah Norullah Noori, a senior military commander also reportedly have ties with al-Qaeda. Khairullah Khairkhwa, a Taliban governor was also allegedly an al-Qaeda trainer. One is believed to be responsible for the deaths of scores of Shiites in acts of religious terror.
The agreement only reportedly includes a one-year travel ban — making it likely that these Taliban commanders will be back on the front lines.
The Administration has been negotiating on this trade for sometimes — years according to some reports. Yet, it clearly decided to violate federal law and not inform Congress. Once again, it is not clear who would have the standing to challenge such a violation due to the rigid standing doctrine created by the federal courts — an issue that I have raised previously in my testimony to Congress.
Putting aside the violation of federal law, do you believe that the United States should negotiate with groups like the Taliban or make trades with such captors? If not, where do we draw the line — with soldiers to exclude citizens? There are clearly arguments to be made by those who believe that we should negotiate with terrorists but the current official policy is that we do not.
Bowe Bergdahl is not a hero Facebook page is another social media site giving the facts. ALL members of Bergdahl’s troop were ordered to sign nondisclosure forms. They now are speaking the truth. Susan Rice said on ABC yesterday that “Bergdahl served w/ honor and distinction.” With these brave soldiers now speaking the truth the public relations boost Obama had hoped is turning into a nightmare. When Carney was asked as today’s presser if Rice’s statement about “honor and distinction” he stammered and evaded.
During House hearings in 2010 regarding closing Gitmo administration officials testified about the detainees. They all stated the 5 terrorists we released were too dangerous to release. Bush released a Taliban in 2007 who returned to the battlefield and killed US soldiers.
It’s apparent no one has read the Rolling Stone piece. When the administration floated this swap back in 2011 they consulted w/ the House. There was BIPARTISAN agreement that this swap was wrong on several levels. On Sunday, Rice gave as an excuse for not consulting w/ Congress as REQUIRED BY LAW that there were serious health issues. Word has leaked from Germany that Bergdahl is in good health. Susan “Baghdad Bob” Rice is a proven liar. She is shameless. This is abuse of one of the few women in this WH.
Somebody around here makes false statements..
Actually I think there are several someones.
I’ve stated my position on Bowe. I stand firm on that. I support his release. I posted a couple of comments stating my posiition. Is there a need to repeat it twenty times?
It is pretty astounding that someone who spent many years testifying in court is able to assert that I am ‘just fine with veterans dying on government healthcare”.
I’d call that unforgivable BS. I’d call it something else, but it would no doubt be deleted.
But will give you the opportunity to defend your statement. Can you please repost where I said I was ‘just fine with veterans dying.
LOL, oh if wishes were pennies…
Paul, They’re grasping. They’re as desperate as the WH. Flop sweating.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0305/p03s02-usmi.html
More on Walter Reed scandal and privatization.
I notice you all backed away from the topic of this thread. Defending this swap was a loser. At least you cam to realize that. Good pivot. But,.you’re losing on the VA also. Time for another pivot.
Read the article on Walter Reed but it sounded like blame shifting to CYA
Well, well well, look who is just fine w/ veterans dying on govt. healthcare. Just as long as we don’t lose any govt. jobs, let them die!
Well, well, well. Look at who wants to privatize the VA. Imagine that.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/09/AR2007030902082.html
Walter Reed scandal and privatization. So, haven’t we learned anything?
Some people would rather see veterans die than to admit that govt. healthcare is an abject failure and privatizing is the logical alternative.
nick, the fact is that as CIC, Obama has sole right to control the release of POWs. End of story. As for your stupid assertion that more hostage taking will result, I guess you have forgotten the we are in a WAR in Afghanistan. I most certainly hope that the Taliban will take MORE hostages instead of KILLING our troops!
On your last post about government failure in health care, again you are delusional since ALL of our more developed industrial countries have that, and are BETTER in health care in ALL metrics on it. If your Ayn Randian paradise is so great, then why are WE at the same level as a third world country like CUBA? Try reality for a change.
What you have to realize about the Conservatives at this site is that when presented with the unpleasant truth; they cover their ears and refuse to hear the facts. Or something like that. Sounds familiar even if not verbatim huh Nick?
On Mon, Jun 2, 2014 at 4:45 PM, JONATHAN TURLEY wrote:
> randyjet commented: “nick, the fact is that as CIC, Obama has sole > right to control the release of POWs. End of story. As for your stupid > assertion that more hostage taking will result, I guess you have forgotten > the we are in a WAR in Afghanistan. I most certainly hope that” >
No, I’m here, do you want something Paul?
Yes, swarthmoremom. And the next damn president and congress who takes a war (or wars) ‘off the books’ should be unceremoniously kicked out.
Unfortunately, brain-dead Americans will have forgotten all the lessons that should have been learned since 9/11.
This is an outrageous and lawless act, which is precisely what I’ve come to expect from this administration and the last one. But, partisanship being what it is, as reflected in the comments here, demonstrates that we are hopelessly divided by two armies of brainwashed apparatchiks who refuse to hold their own team accountable.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304899704579391454059654682 An enormous amount of head injuries in Iraq and Afghanistan which will require long term treatment.
Annie,
Kurtzman link is perfecto.
Believer,
That moniker says a lot.
A believer is someone easily convinced. Someone gullible.
A believer in a particular philosophy or system of conduct is someone who has done the research and discovered a Gem.
A “Believer” is someone who makes a practice of believing.
A less than discriminate person.
Seems you have decided to believe the Republican spiel.
“We are not Racist”
“We want to help the poor”
“We want to improve the Economy” (despite spending the twelve years before Obama destroying it and further impoverishing the poor and Middle Class)
“We want to return America to her former glory”
“All we need do is cleanse ourselves of the poor, the black, and the liberals to become the Gawd’ Fearin’ Country we oncest’ wus’.”
“Mari-huchie is BAD. Gawd is Good. Foreplay is “Get in the truck Bitch”
Really? Well I have choose to seek out those who believe in people; not parties. I prefer to align myself with those who are more concerned about helping the poor and middle class of America than about killing the poor of other nations. Those who feel compassion for a soldier whose conscience won’t allow him to slaughter with ruthless abandon as a mater of foreign policy. So in short; I find your politics and your attitude both repulsive and naïve; a strange combination of qualities; No?
But hey. This is America; Right? Even Republicans have a right to have an opinion.
Not so long ago, I would have said that was obvious. But the Republican Party has moved from Elitist to Racist. From Right-Wing to Right-Wingtip.
Never before have I been so morally and politically offended by the cold-blooded nature of the Republican Agenda.
Never before have I spent so much time listening to Republicans denying their Racism and their Elitism.
So many Republicans.
Why?
Because never before has their been such cause for the allegations of Racism and Elitism leveled constantly upon the body of the soon dead Party.
Much like one of the Right-Wing Extremists who wind up self destructing after a spree of killings and atrocities; the Republican party is in in a downward spiral of self destruction all it’s own after adopting ever more selfish and damaging policies and attempting to carry them out; at the expense of the American people whom they have long ago stopped representing.
Will I be “Marginalized” by the “Cool” kids? Hmm. My opinions may seem rather far Left.
In truth I am not a fan of either Party; but Republicans? Just too ready to buy the “Party Line”.
Democrats; not able to decide on a cohesive agenda that works for all.
But with the Dems there is room for descent. With the GOP? NO room at all. Devout adherence to the dictates of the 1%.
swarthmoremom
I picked this up from your link. I think it is key to the VA problem.
“History suggests that VA’s requirements from these two operations will continue to grow long after the last combatant leaves Afghanistan — maybe as much as a decade, maybe even more,” VA Secretary Eric K. Shinseki told the committee.
Shinseki noted that Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are using VA services “at unprecedented levels.” Out of 1.4 million who have returned from service in those wars, 67 percent have used some VA benefit or service — “a far higher percentage than those from previous wars,” Shinseki said.”
______________________________________________________
I think Shinseki understates the VA’s requirements in the years to come. But I continue to stress the numbers problem, rather than money. Maybe it is just a romantic view, but today’s docs seem to work miracles under pretty unconventional conditions.
Help! I’ve lost a post.