Was the Bergdahl 5-for-1 trade politically timed?

[radcen]

Was the Bergdahl 5-for-1 trade politically timed?

Some have mentioned the "coincidence" of this happening just at the right time to push the current VA scandal off the headlines and out of people's consciousness. Do you believe that this was timed specifically for that reason?

I do not. There are many issues that I do question regarding this person and his actions & loyalties, but the timing is not one of them. Primarily because these things take time to negotiate, and the Taliban aren't exactly quick and easy to deal with. I believe that this has been in the works for months, and couldn't be put together in a week.

Now, if you were to say that it was put together by the administration to give the administration a positive accomplishment to point at in a general sense, I can buy into that. The timing with the VA scandal is, in my opinion, legitimate coincidence.

 

[WCH]

Well let's see. They couldn't wait 30 more day for Congressional approval (after waiting 5 years already)

So...YES!

BTW: the Admin. didn't directly deal with the Taliban, it was through an intermediary. (Qatar)

 

[tres borrachos]

As is the case with most everything this administration does, it was politically expedient.

 

[nota bene]

If you believe in coincidences, this certainly was a fortuitous one, wasn't it?

Or not...because now there is going to be legit argument about the 5-for-1, especially this one (at least as it's beginning to appear). Was this a good-sense decision? I think that across the aisles, many folks are going to say no.

 

[Zyphlin]

I have a LOT of questions regarding this deal. The timing is not one of them.

 

[radcen]

Well let's see. They couldn't wait 30 more day for Congressional approval (after waiting 5 years already)

So...YES!

BTW: the Admin. didn't directly deal with the Taliban, it was through an intermediary. (Qatar)

Yes, I know... which takes even more time, which bolsters my conclusion that it wasn't hammered together in a week.

If you believe in coincidences, this certainly was a fortuitous one, wasn't it?

Or not...because now there is going to be legit argument about the 5-for-1, especially this one (at least as it's beginning to appear). Was this a good-sense decision? I think that across the aisles, many folks are going to say no.

If what is being said is correct, I agree it was not a good deal/decision. But, coincidences can happen in politics as well, so yes, it was/is fortuitous.

FWIW, I don't think the VA scandal is going away, either. In fact, it may linger on the back burner and come back to burn them anyway.

ETA: Keep in mind that I am questioning only the accusation of timing. Nothing else. I have serious reservations and issues with other aspects, but will comment on those in other threads.

 

[WCH]

I have a LOT of questions regarding this deal. The timing is not one of them.

It hasn't been peculiar for this admin. to do their deeds on a Friday or on the weekend to avoid prime time or next day coverage.

 

[notquiteright]

Was the Bergdahl 5-for-1 trade politically timed? Some have mentioned the "coincidence" of this happening just at the right time to push the current VA scandal off the headlines and out of people's consciousness. Do you believe that this was timed specifically for that reason? I do not. There are many issues that I do question regarding this person and his actions & loyalties, but the timing is not one of them. Primarily because these things take time to negotiate, and the Taliban aren't exactly quick and easy to deal with. I believe that this has been in the works for months, and couldn't be put together in a week. Now, if you were to say that it was put together by the administration to give the administration a positive accomplishment to point at in a general sense, I can buy into that. The timing with the VA scandal is, in my opinion, legitimate coincidence.

So your premise is the VA scandal would have died in 30 days so the Obama Administration acted quickly to use Berdahl?

Or is it the GOP couldn't keep the VA scandal in the public eye for 30 days so the Obama Administration acted?

Or perhaps the Veterans would just shrug and get on with life if the spotlight is turned away for a day or two?

Perhaps you think all those never served chest thumpers on how our vets should get the very best, will look at any excuse to go back to ignoring Service to Country if given ANY excuse to do so?

Maybe, just maybe you think the GOP won't leap up and down and try to use the 30 notification as yet another reason to pummel the Obama Administration?

Now maybe because the negotiations have been going on for so long and had several near misses the Obama Administration decided they couldn't wait out the 30 day notification period because either the Taliban would change their minds, or a CON or two will blow the deal by leaking it from his CON soapbox so a deal will never be struck.

If the Obama Administration was going to try and deflect from a scandal the Benghazi scandal should have drawn the prisoner swap, given the laundry list of scandals the CONs are pushing it seems so arbitrary the VA scandal would be the one they picked to 'cover for'.

(Do note when the Reagan Administration violated law in the Iran/Contra deal so little was said by the CONs on that 'lawlessness'. Those that were charged got off for a host of reasons, from refusal to declassify documents for a defense to flat out pardons once the VP became President)

I don't see this as an attempt to deflect from the VA scandal, that will survive being off the front page for a day or two- (the CONs are helping keep the VA story off the front page by pushing the story about 6 men killed searching for Berdahl and the soldier's buddies saying the prisoner was nothing more than a deserter.

 

[Zyphlin]

It hasn't been peculiar for this admin. to do their deeds on a Friday or on the weekend to avoid prime time or next day coverage.

Well, I don't consider that in terms of "politically timed".

Don't know what to tell you, but it's not been peculiar for this admin, other admin, businesses, people campaigning, sports teams, etc to do that. I don't think of that as "politically timed" but rather a PR notion, which is different. The Obama Administration is hardly the first group, or even administration, to utilize end of week announcements of things.

When I see questions regarding political timing I'm thinking in terms of to help with an election, to get another story off the front pages, etc. Not releasing something on a friday

 

[radcen]

Well, I don't consider that in terms of "politically timed".

Don't know what to tell you, but it's not been peculiar for this admin, other admin, businesses, people campaigning, sports teams, etc to do that. I don't think of that as "politically timed" but rather a PR notion, which is different. The Obama Administration is hardly the first group, or even administration, to utilize end of week announcements of things.

When I see questions regarding political timing I'm thinking in terms of to help with an election, to get another story off the front pages, etc. Not releasing something on a friday

Bingo! You understand the premise of the thread.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

I have questions bout the 30 day notification and what not. But as far as I can tell, no it was not.

 

[Deuce]

Yeah, I mean look at all the positive feedback this has created for Obama....

 

[Gipper]

I'm less concerned about WHEN it happened and more about THAT it happened.

 

[Threegoofs]

Was the Bergdahl 5-for-1 trade politically timed?

Some have mentioned the "coincidence" of this happening just at the right time to push the current VA scandal off the headlines and out of people's consciousness. Do you believe that this was timed specifically for that reason?

I do not. There are many issues that I do question regarding this person and his actions & loyalties, but the timing is not one of them. Primarily because these things take time to negotiate, and the Taliban aren't exactly quick and easy to deal with. I believe that this has been in the works for months, and couldn't be put together in a week.

Now, if you were to say that it was put together by the administration to give the administration a positive accomplishment to point at in a general sense, I can buy into that. The timing with the VA scandal is, in my opinion, legitimate coincidence.

LOL. If it happened last month, it would have been to push Benghazi out of the headlines. If it was 6 months ago, it would be to push the ACA out of the headlines. If it happened a year ago, it would have been to push Benghazi (part 1) out of the headlines.

The constant fake scandals are ever blooming.

 

[Tothian]

Not sure. But it seemed foolish.

 

[Fenton]

So your premise is the VA scandal would have died in 30 days so the Obama Administration acted quickly to use Berdahl?

Or is it the GOP couldn't keep the VA scandal in the public eye for 30 days so the Obama Administration acted?

Or perhaps the Veterans would just shrug and get on with life if the spotlight is turned away for a day or two?

Perhaps you think all those never served chest thumpers on how our vets should get the very best, will look at any excuse to go back to ignoring Service to Country if given ANY excuse to do so?

Maybe, just maybe you think the GOP won't leap up and down and try to use the 30 notification as yet another reason to pummel the Obama Administration?

Now maybe because the negotiations have been going on for so long and had several near misses the Obama Administration decided they couldn't wait out the 30 day notification period because either the Taliban would change their minds, or a CON or two will blow the deal by leaking it from his CON soapbox so a deal will never be struck.

If the Obama Administration was going to try and deflect from a scandal the Benghazi scandal should have drawn the prisoner swap, given the laundry list of scandals the CONs are pushing it seems so arbitrary the VA scandal would be the one they picked to 'cover for'.

(Do note when the Reagan Administration violated law in the Iran/Contra deal so little was said by the CONs on that 'lawlessness'. Those that were charged got off for a host of reasons, from refusal to declassify documents for a defense to flat out pardons once the VP became President)

I don't see this as an attempt to deflect from the VA scandal, that will survive being off the front page for a day or two- (the CONs are helping keep the VA story off the front page by pushing the story about 6 men killed searching for Berdahl and the soldier's buddies saying the prisoner was nothing more than a deserter.

There is enough time for ALL of Obama's scandals to be addressed.

And Cons aren't purposely trying to push one scandal over the other.

 

[Fenton]

LOL. If it happened last month, it would have been to push Benghazi out of the headlines. If it was 6 months ago, it would be to push the ACA out of the headlines. If it happened a year ago, it would have been to push Benghazi (part 1) out of the headlines.

The constant fake scandals are ever blooming.

The constant politicizing of real scandals by the left is endless too apparently.

 

[Lutherf]

Yes, I know... which takes even more time, which bolsters my conclusion that it wasn't hammered together in a week.



If what is being said is correct, I agree it was not a good deal/decision. But, coincidences can happen in politics as well, so yes, it was/is fortuitous.

FWIW, I don't think the VA scandal is going away, either. In fact, it may linger on the back burner and come back to burn them anyway.

ETA: Keep in mind that I am questioning only the accusation of timing. Nothing else. I have serious reservations and issues with other aspects, but will comment on those in other threads.

This deal or a similar one has been discussed for years so setting it up probably didn't require more than a couple of phone calls.

From the sounds of things the administration didn't consult with anybody before they pulled the trigger (though they may wish they had at this point) so it has all the hallmarks of something that got pulled out of the fridge and put on the table in a great big hurry. Based on that I don't for a minute believe it was a coincidence. It looks like a rush job from the turd polishing department that exploded unexpectedly.

 

[US Conservative]

Politically timed by Obama in response to the VA scandal. He needed to do some damage control, by pedalling the notion that he cares about the troops.

Of course, trading an apparent deserter (2nd to murder in the military as far as severity) who caused several Americans to be killed in exchange for 5 of the nastiest terrorists in the world (who also caused American deaths in their captures) is seen as a slap in the face by military members and the American people. And terrorists aren't POW's.

And then he has the gall to spike the football by holding that rose garden dog and pony show.

 

[radcen]

This deal or a similar one has been discussed for years so setting it up probably didn't require more than a couple of phone calls.

From the sounds of things the administration didn't consult with anybody before they pulled the trigger (though they may wish they had at this point) so it has all the hallmarks of something that got pulled out of the fridge and put on the table in a great big hurry. Based on that I don't for a minute believe it was a coincidence. It looks like a rush job from the turd polishing department that exploded unexpectedly.

You make it sounds like a used car deal.

"Hey, Abdullah, you still got that 5 yr old model? Yeah? I'll take it for the 5 grand like we talked about!"

No offense, doesn't sound plausible to me.

 

[BrianBoroihme]

Was the Bergdahl 5-for-1 trade politically timed?

Some have mentioned the "coincidence" of this happening just at the right time to push the current VA scandal off the headlines and out of people's consciousness. Do you believe that this was timed specifically for that reason?

I do not. There are many issues that I do question regarding this person and his actions & loyalties, but the timing is not one of them. Primarily because these things take time to negotiate, and the Taliban aren't exactly quick and easy to deal with. I believe that this has been in the works for months, and couldn't be put together in a week.

Now, if you were to say that it was put together by the administration to give the administration a positive accomplishment to point at in a general sense, I can buy into that. The timing with the VA scandal is, in my opinion, legitimate coincidence.

Itr did push the VA off the radar, but at what cost. The Rose Garden ceremony with Papa Mullah Bergdahl? The anti-American emails between parents and baby Taliban Bergdahl? The political damage to himself...Sen Feinstein said the prez lied. The fact that this guy WALKED away and surrendered to the Taliban? The fact that another soldier was killed trying to get him back?

No, this is much worse than the VA for the president. He is absolutely tone deaf.

 

[JumpinJack]

Was the Bergdahl 5-for-1 trade politically timed?

Some have mentioned the "coincidence" of this happening just at the right time to push the current VA scandal off the headlines and out of people's consciousness. Do you believe that this was timed specifically for that reason?

I do not. There are many issues that I do question regarding this person and his actions & loyalties, but the timing is not one of them. Primarily because these things take time to negotiate, and the Taliban aren't exactly quick and easy to deal with. I believe that this has been in the works for months, and couldn't be put together in a week.

Now, if you were to say that it was put together by the administration to give the administration a positive accomplishment to point at in a general sense, I can buy into that. The timing with the VA scandal is, in my opinion, legitimate coincidence.

Now that's just silly. The administration is not running away from the VA scandal at all. It is as angry about it as the rest of the country. It doesn't hurt the Democrats politically, either, I think. It's a VA Dept scandal. Not a WH scandal.

 

[radcen]

This deal or a similar one has been discussed for years so setting it up probably didn't require more than a couple of phone calls.

From the sounds of things the administration didn't consult with anybody before they pulled the trigger (though they may wish they had at this point) so it has all the hallmarks of something that got pulled out of the fridge and put on the table in a great big hurry. Based on that I don't for a minute believe it was a coincidence. It looks like a rush job from the turd polishing department that exploded unexpectedly.

You make it sounds like a used car deal.

"Hey, Abdullah, you still got that 5 yr old model? Yeah? I'll take it for the 5 grand like we talked about!"

No offense, doesn't sound plausible to me.

Still not sure I agree with the premise that it was put together quickly, but I could maybe buy this as a potential scenario...

The deal had been in the works for months, never with an agreement. The Taliban wants 5 specific people in exchange for one. We say no. We're at am impasse. Then, we suddenly get motivated and say, "Ok, we'll give you what you want, but it has to be done RIGHT NOW! You have three days to decide. Take it or leave it."

That's plausible. Unlikely, but plausible.

Now that's just silly. The administration is not running away from the VA scandal at all. It is as angry about it as the rest of the country. It doesn't hurt the Democrats politically, either, I think. It's a VA Dept scandal. Not a WH scandal.

It hurts the Dems only because they're the ones in the WH at the moment. VA mismanagement goes back decades and covers all administrations and parties, but the one in the WH when something happens gets the good luck of good stuff happening or the bad luck of a scandal.

 

[plutonium]

it was not politically timed because it had a negative effect on the prez....

 

[Kobie]

It hasn't been peculiar for this admin. to do their deeds on a Friday or on the weekend to avoid prime time or next day coverage.

Or any other. Obama did not invent the Friday News Dump.