From "Time" (yeah, that "Time", the "news" magazine which has been running interference for Zero for 6 years):
"To pull off the prisoner swap of five Taliban leaders for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, the White House overrode an existing interagency process charged with debating the transfer of Guantanamo Bay prisoners and dismissed long-standing Pentagon and intelligence community concerns based on Top Secret intelligence about the dangers of releasing the five men, sources familiar with the debate tell TIME.
National Security Council officials at the White House decline to describe the work of the ad hoc process they established to trade the prisoners, or to detail the measures they have taken to limit the threat the Taliban officials may pose. They say consensus on the plan was reached by the top officials of Obama’s national security team, including representatives from the Pentagon, State Department, intelligence community and Joint Chiefs of Staff. “These releases were worked extensively through deputies and principals,” says National Security Counsel Deputy for Strategic Communications Ben Rhodes. “There was not a dissent on moving forward with this plan.”
But officials in the Pentagon and intelligence communities had successfully fought off release of the five men in the past, officials tell TIME. “This was out of the norm,” says one official familiar with the debate over the dangers of releasing the five Taliban officials. “There was never the conversation.” Obama’s move was an ultimate victory for those at the White House and the State Department who had previously argued the military should “suck it up and salute,” says the official familiar with the debate.
Quote: Cincinnatus wrote in post #1From "Time" (yeah, that "Time", the "news" magazine which has been running interference for Zero for 6 years):
They are not the only ones. Chris Matthews, Slate, The Daily Beast and quite a few other Leftists are about done defending Zero over this. The few left pushing talking points for the Regime are left trying to explain that this action by Zero is OK because Bush did it. That basically destroys their whole reason for being considering they have pushed non stop that the whole purpose of Zero was to be the anti NeoCon evil Bush. Hell, a whole lot of Rat congressmen are running away from this or actually saying they are upset about it. This reminds me of when Nixon started losing major support on the Right and was Left with a handful of partisans supporting him. In the end, they eventually told him to give up.
Chevrolet....Building A Better Way To See The U.S.A. (or St Peter depending on which deathtrap you bought).
Not to worry, my friends. Breitbart's Big Journalism reports that after a brief period of sanity Time has returned to the fold and is even now begging Obama for forgiveness for any lapses.
"Time Magazine: Obama Didn't 'Negotiate with Terrorists' But Other Presidents Did"
"Time magazine is rushing to President Obama's side to defend him against the charge that he negotiated with terrorists to secure the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl.
The magazine tells readers that the maxim that America doesn't negotiate with terrorists is more of a general ideal than a hard-bound policy and cites several other presidents who, the magazine claims, did negotiate with terrorists.
Time notes that during the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis Jimmy Carter negotiated with the Iranian Mullahs who took over Iran after deposing the Shah. Reagan also negotiated with the Mullahs, Time notes.
Of course, in both cases the Mullahs were then the official government in Iran, whereas today the Taliban are not an officially recognized government in Afghanistan.
The magazine also reminds readers that Bill Clinton met with Irish Republican Army leader Gerry Adams in the mid-1990s. Still, in that case Clinton was not "negotiating" for the release of American soldiers. Clinton's was a political move, not a traditional "negotiation."
Oddly, Time treats the Taliban as a single organization, calling it a "savage and deplorable organization" that the magazine yet notes "is not on the State Department’s official list of terrorist organizations."
In truth, though, the Taliban is not really a "the," but a "they." The Taliban is a catch-all phrase used to describe a loosely knit movement of many different groups, some of which don't work well with the others. Often these groups are based on local tribes as opposed to members of a centrally controlled group.
There are essentially two separate "Talibans," one in Pakistan and one in Afghanistan.
Regardless, Time magazine insists that whatever was going on, "the real debate isn’t whether Obama negotiated with terrorists – he didn’t." "
Time can't put the genie back in the bottle no matter what their inside man in the Regime tells them...
ZitatJay Carney was Time's Washington Bureau Deputy Chief from 2003 to 2005, and Chief from September 2005 until December 2008. He was assigned to the magazine's Washington Bureau in that tenure while also being able to write about politics and national affairs. Carney has also worked for CNN (another TIME Warner division) as a special correspondent.
Chevrolet....Building A Better Way To See The U.S.A. (or St Peter depending on which deathtrap you bought).