In the history of mankind, many republics have risen, have flourished for a less or greater time, and then have fallen because their citizens lost the power of governing themselves and thereby of governing their state. TR


The Obama Morning News || June 2, 2014

Questions begin about Berghdal release . . . Washington Post
Some in the military raise concerns over the cost of rescuing Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, while Republicans question the Obama administration’s decision-making.

Resentment among Bergdahl’s peers
. . . Washington Post
Bergdahl’s departure from his Afghan post in 2009 led to a massive search that some say endangered troops, and some service members think he should be held accountable.

Cruz: Have we put a price on U.S. soldiers? . . . Newsmax
“The terms of the deal are very troubling . . . how many soldiers lost their lives to capture those five Taliban we released?”

Mullah Omar: This is a big victory . . . AFP
Taliban supreme leader Mullah Mohammad Omar Sunday hailed the release of five senior insurgents in exchange for U.S. soldier Bowe Bergdahl as a “big victory”.

EPA seeks to cut emissions 30 percent . . . Associated Press
The proposal is one of the most significant steps the U.S. has taken to curb greenhouse-gas emissions.

Rule poses dangers for Democrats . . . Politico
The EPA rule poses obvious dangers in November in coal country and other energy-rich states.

GOP Obamacare fears come true . . . Politico
A shift to a bigger, more permanent Washington-controlled system is instead underway — without preparation, funding or even public discussion.

Obama trip to be dominated by Ukraine . . . National Journal
The plan had been for an amiable time with Putin

28 thoughts on “The Obama Morning News || June 2, 2014”

  1. Obama’s Bad Trade – American Thinker

    From Article 85 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice:

    (c) Any person found guilty of desertion or attempt to desert shall be punished, if the offense is committed in time of war, by death or such other punishment as a court-martial may direct, but if the desertion or attempt to desert occurs at any other time, by such punishment, other than death, as a court-martial may direct.

  2. Why are there no Democrats crying foul over the Bergdahl deal? I think former Connecticut Senator Lieberman might have, he a middle of the road Dem, often known for taking his own party to task. I’m tired of the media making the naysayers all Rs.

    1. I was surprised to read on Newsmax (Bloomberg) this morning the fact that people actually died in the search for Bergdahl. Of course, no one is certain what Bloomberg is, probably just is own thing, but at least it’s a contrast to the WaPo article Keith has up which does not mention the KIA,

  3. Emir of Qatar directly to O: “Enable us to have confidence that these prisoners wil be carefully watched, That their ability to move will be contained.
    So what if O was told they will stay put for a year. That does not mean they cannot discuss evil, plan evil, etc.

  4. Several people who commented yesterday on the search for Bergdahl actually named the names of troops who were KIA in that search. The WaPo article does not go into that, but I supposed I should be happy that they did write about the extensive search for Bergdahl and how the troops are unhappy about that.

    Every week I think it can’t get any worse under Obama, but every week I am also surprised by a new scandal that is worse than the one before. What’s going to happen this week?

    1. Congress is stating he did not give the 30 day notice.
      That is being stated on Fox and in newspapers.
      What is not being stated: is that O signed a bill containing the latest version of the transfer restictions into law, He issued a Signing Statement claiming he could overide them under his Executive Order.
      Has anyone here at WHD read that as well? What are your thoughts on why this is not being discussed.

      1. Perhaps the GOP is waiting until after the November election to start challenging the signing statement provisions in the courts. I hope so, but maybe they want to keep those expanding presidential powers for themselves in which case we are truly lost. IANAL, but wouldn’t you think that if a President issues a signing statement, it should still not be in contradiction of established law?

        1. I agree with you regarding the contradiction of the established law.
          I just didn’t understand why everyone is well aware of the 30 days not given to Congress, but no one is discussing the that Signing Statement.
          Let’s only hope and pray that the GOP does not what to expand such powers for themself.

  5. In Obama’s world Bergdahl is a good soldier. Worth trading 5 terrorists who hate America for. And neither he nor anyone in his Administration has even bothered to nod toward the men who were killed on search missions to rescue this man who has said that he is ashamed to be an American. And this meme that they have running now, that 5 years is punishment enough is BS.

    If the military does nothing, then our military now serves a man and not a country. The first step was allowing the Hasan terrorist act to be a “workplace incident”.

    Hard words for me to even consider.

    1. You said it all there. We should be in mourning for those killed in action in the search for the deserter Bowe, not celebrating his return in exchange for five dangerous terrorists who will plot and kill Americans again.
      Like Julie said above here, you think things could not get any worse each week and then they do.
      I am starting to dread seeing the news each day.

    2. Spot on. Hasan could have very well been but a first step in a long term plan.

      I agree about the military. If they let this pass without investigating Bergdahl’s departure from base via court martial, our military not only serves one man but a weak one at that. It would undermine the strength and efficacy of our armed forces and therefore country.

      Oh, btw, notice the name Shinseki and what it stands for have disappeared from the news to make room for Bergdahl’s story.

      1. I dismissed earlier, but no longer do, the string of inconvenient facts. Obama drops in unexpectedly on the troops in Afghanistan, the CIA chief of station is outed, and Obama scoops up a deserter in return for the release of 5 vile terrorists whose mission in life is to destroy this country.

        And Susan Rice hits the Sunday Talk Shows!

        Been there. Done that.

        Some say the CIA chief was outed because he disapproved of this swap.

        1. Interesting about the CIA chief. Someone, John Fund I think, compared Susan Rice’s TV appearances yesterday on behalf of the swap with her appearances on the five talk shows after Benghazi. A willing dupe if there ever was one.

          1. I had not hear that either about the CIA station chief being opposed to the exchange…it sounds logical considering all that this administration has already done to our troops and our standing in the world.

          2. oops clumsy today. What I read about the CIA COS was speculation or conjecture. No one has said that this is the case.

            To me, it is reasonable to assume that this could be the case. The Obama Administration operates like thugs.

        2. I agree on Rice! I don’t think we know much for sure–but of course we are opinionated anyhow. But when I saw Rice setting up straw men, I almost screamed.

  6. Another version of Bergdahl’s desertion…from a commenter on Alan West’s blog – 3 months ago.
    The circumstances of Bergdahl’s disappearance certainly must have crossed the desk of high level officials, including Obama. We have been grossly misled by Obama, Hagel, Rice, et al, as to the facts surrounding this soldier.
    Susan Rice lied again on the Sunday shows – stating that the reason the 30 day law was ignored was due to Bergdah’s poor health – they couldn’t wait. But all reports contradict her – Bergdahl is reportedly in good health!
    Obama needs to come clean, and Bergdahl needs to be dealth with (if these stories are true).

    “Bowe Bergdahl is no “hero”. Here are the facts: In the weeks leading up to his “capture”, Bergdahl made statements that he was “ashamed to be an American” and “The horror that is america is disgusting.” He shipped his personal belongings home. He asked his Squad Leader what would happen if he took someone else’s weapon and other sensitive items off base.

    On the day of his departure, he was drinking with the Afghans he had befriended. After being caught, he was verbally reprimanded. That evening, angry after being reprimanded, he left behind his weapons, took a knife (by some statements up to five knives), some bottled water, and hid in the back of a vehicle owned by one of the local laborers. Bergdahl and at least two Afghans then drove off base to go smoke hashish, according to multiple statements. After smoking hashish, Bergdahl then walked off into the countryside. By some accounts, he set off to go “find himself” in the mountains. By other accounts, his plan was to walk to Pakistan.

    He was discovered missing the next morning at about 0900. By 1200 that day, the entire war in Afghanistan had ground to a halt as all available air assets in Afghanistan were diverted to search for Bergdahl.

    In the end assessment, the acts of this “soldier” cost the lives of other Americans (ones that didn’t leave their posts in combat), and cost us hundreds of millions of dollars due to his selfish, dishonorable acts. He is a deserter, EVERYBODY in the Chain of Command knows it, and the fact that the US Government continues to pay and promote him shows the lengths they will go to manipulate public opinion.

    Now, some of you will insist that we make every effort to rescue this deserter, that we will “leave no man behind”. Ask yourself: Knowing the facts, would you send your son or daughter to rescue him? If not, why should someone else’s son or daughter, husband or wife, brother or sister, risk their lives to rescue someone who intentionally left their post in a time of war and deserted? Ask yourself why there is no official statement as to the circumstances of his capture? I anticipate a sudden “deal” being made just before the mid-term elections, with Bowe returning to a hero’s welcome, and a White House dinner with the Dali Bama.”

        1. oops This was a comment made in response to West’s piece written in February. It’s interesting to read in light of current events.

  7. Pathetic.
    “Ninety percent of reassurance is showing up,” said Jeremy Shapiro, recalling Woody Allen’s famous dictum. Shapiro, a senior adviser on Europe and a member of the State Department’s policy planning staff in Obama’s first term, added, “The main thing he has to do on the trip is show up in terms of Poland. Essentially, what he’s trying to say to Poland and to other Eastern European countries in NATO is that the United States is behind you.”
    He will probably show up — and show up late. The empty suit spouting empty promises. And everyone knows that. Except the MSM propaganda machine who will speak adoringly of their glorious leader.


    1. Ledeen.
      And my final contribution because my outrage is even driving me crazy.

      Good piece by Christopher Adams on the futility of GOP defense of against the law when considering the Obama Administration.

      For me, makes me think about Obama’s recent addition to his legal staff —

      In this article though it is useful to note that Rep. Frank Wolfe is taking a different tack with the DOJ. He is withholding funds from DOJ each time they fail to respond. Good on Wolfe. The House should use the power of the purse more. Stuff like this gets buried in the outrage of the Obama daily messes.

Comments are closed.