From what I’m reading, the justification for the Bergdahl swap without Congressional notification has been that his health was deteriorating. But here’s what the Los Angeles Times has to say (a similar article was in today’s Tribune, and the story is in other outlets, too):
Stung by mounting criticism that they had failed to notify Congress before moving the five Afghan prisoners from Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, administration and military officials provided a classified briefing to the full Senate, a rare occurrence. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel agreed to testify in the House next week, with more hearings to follow.
Senators were shown a video shot by the Taliban late last year; it has not been publicly released.
Many senators were clearly moved by the video, which they said portrayed Bergdahl sitting upright on a blanket, with a halting speech pattern.
“He looked either drugged or tired or sick,” said Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), who said the closed briefing gave him more confidence in the administration’s decision. “This man was not in a good condition.”
Sen. Mark Steven Kirk (R-Ill.) said, “I definitely think it would have had an emotional impact on the president, which is probably why the Taliban released it.”
Others were left unswayed.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said he saw “no evidence” Bergdahl’s health posed an immediate danger that would justify the swap of the high-level Taliban detainees. And Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin III of West Virginia said the concerns raised by the administration over Bergdahl’s health “did not sell me at all.”
The odd thing is that in the printed Tribune version of this article, it says the video was shot in January. The online article on the Chicago Tribune site is a bit different still, saying there’s no date given for the video but it’s surmised to have been filmed in December due to references to Mandela’s death.
In fact, this online article seems to suggest that Bergdahl’s health had nothing to do with the lack of Congressional notification at all: the negotiations were ongoing, and nothing happened especially suddenly. The report says that “Administration officials got assurances from Qatar, where the five released prisoners are being transferred, that it would take responsibility for enforcing mitigation measures stipulated in the deal. However, as part of the agreement with Qatar, the Obama administration won’t say what those measures are.” — which is odd because everything I’m reading says that there are no “measures” except that the Taliban remain in Qatar for a year.
So why didn’t they notify Congress? Here’s the one remaining sentence that offers an explanation: “Leaks had scuttled past operations,” according to an administration official.
Why would a leak happen? And why would it end the operation? I take this to mean that they weren’t taken by surprise by the lack of support for their decision, but they knew they’d have opposition.
UPDATE: Did I really figure this out before thegatewaypundit.com?
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In