Hunter asks unanswered questions about Bergdahl ransom
In the Washington Times, Bill Gertz reports that California Congressman Duncan Hunter is continuing to ask the Obama Administration about the failed ransom payment that the Department of Defense paid to a member of the Haqqani network of terrorists for the release of Bowe Bergdahl, the hostage they held for five years. Since it is the policy of the US government to not pay ransoms to terrorists;
White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters Tuesday that Mr. Obama “continues to believe, as previous presidents have concluded, that it’s not in the best interest of American citizens to pay ransoms to any organization, let alone a terrorist organization.”
“And the reason for that is simple: We don’t want to put other American citizens at even greater risk when they’re around the world,” he said.
[…]
The Pentagon’s spin on the payment is that the money was not technically a ransom. Instead, defense officials are claiming the cash was intelligence money paid to a source for information that would lead to the release of Sgt. Bergdahl.
Needless to say, the fellow to whom the government paid the ransom absconded with the funds, and then in addition to the money, we also released five hardened terrorists.
Officials said the Bergdahl ransom was an unspecified large amount of money and that the exchange was handled by the Army’s elite Delta Force anti-terrorism squad. The FBI also was involved in the ransom payment attempt and was waiting inside Afghanistan’s border with North Waziristan when the release failed, confirming that it had been a scam.
So, whoever it was that stole the cash bought many happy endings at the goat farm. The US is starting to look like the world’s nerdy victim in all of our foreign policy dealings.
Thanks to Chief Tango for the link.
Category: Terror War
What happened to this dirt bag after the investigation?
And, you should have captioned the photo with the guy on the left saying “Does this mean I only get 71?
Or perhaps, “One down, 71 to go . . . . “
I still think that’s the epic picture to post on Man Love Thursday.
Own it, Bergdahl.
No doubt the Foleys who were threatened with prosecution if they tried to pay their son’s ransom might also be interested in this story…
Why could we pay a ransom for Berghdahl and not allow the Foleys to pay ransom using their own money?
I understand the concept that we don’t want to pay terrorists, but this story sort of puts all that in a new light doesn’t it.
If I were the Foleys and this turns out to be a true course of events, I would be looking to punish the government with as large a piece of litigation as I could bring to bear.
The laws don’t apply to The Emperor’s administration. Tonight, as we will learn, he will tell Congress, in so many words, that they can stick the Constitution as well. I can’t even keep track of the number of times he or members of his administration have broken or circumvented the law. And Congress does what? Talks.
Go Gatas!
Nice Corrine Brown reference O-4E!!
Talk about your inane and idiotic waste of work scheduled time.
The US policy of not negotiating with terrorists is–how you say in English? Og yeah, BULLSHIT. The charade officially ended with the negotiations between the US Government, at the direction of The Emperor. The can was opened. The worms are out. I see, according to Fox News yesterday, that one of the released terrorists is an ISIS recruiter in Pakistan. (No, this isn’t urban legend, this time.)
The terrorist working as a recruiter in Pakistan was released from GITMO in 2005 due to poor health and being “too old” to fight. He was not one of the terrorists swapped for Bergdahl.
There is no indication that any of the terrorists illegally swapped for Bergdahl has left Qatar.
http://insider.foxnews.com/2014/11/19/herridge-freed-gitmo-prisoner-now-chief-isis-recruiter-pakistan
Well, then, I’m 0-2 on this issue. I get one more swing.
“There is no indication that any of the terrorists illegally swapped for Bergdahl has left Qatar.”
Yup, they’re following the letter of the agreement. If this was 30 years ago, they would be hamstrung. But we all know that they can do a lot sitting in Qatar.
The terrorists are patient, if anything. The referenced detainee released in 2005 is at it now. I’m going to guess that the “fab five” will take a break and wait for a while before they go back to the fight.
There’s no real reason for them to get back into the fight right now anyway. Once the heat has cooled off, they’ll go back to work.
I think it ended long before Obummer. I just wonder if this cash payment was more or less than the $12 million or so in weapons that we sold to Iran to get hostages back from Hezbollah in the 80s.
Man, that must have really stuck in the craws of those Delta boys.
The Unit & HRT getting tossed under POtuS Obumble’s bus…c’mon Jan 2017 get here already.
I guess the silver lining here is that I can say that Congressman Hunter is earning the vote I cast for him.
An unspecified large amount of whose money? If it’s ours, then I want to know how much we lost. (Keeping a personal ledger here 🙂 )
I gave up trying to keep up JBS. Too many decimals and math was never my strong suit….
The entire problem with the administration and their financial policies in a nutshell: too many zeroes.
Josh Earnest told reporters Tuesday that Mr. Obama “continues to believe, as previous presidents have concluded, that it’s not in the best interest of American citizens to pay ransoms to any organization, let alone a terrorist organization.”
Hmmm. So, they agree that it is not in our collective best interest to negotiate with and/or pay ransom to terrorists, but they did not say that they were even remotely concerned in doing what is in our collective best interest. In other words, “Yeah, it’s not in our best interest to do this, but that won’t stop us from doing it anyway. We are not interested in what is good for Americans, only what is good for our socialist agenda.”
“The Pentagon’s spin on the payment is that the money was not technically a ransom. Instead, defense officials are claiming the cash was intelligence money paid to a source for information that would lead to the release of Sgt. Bergdahl.”
Yea, whatever works guys. If your first fast ball is a hit out of the park with bullshit written all over it, change up to the curve on the next hitter.
“Defense officials are claiming the cash was intelligence money paid to a source for information that would lead to the release of Sgt. Bergdahl.”
Gee, isn’t that the way a RANSOM deal usually goes down? We leave a certain amount of money with someone or at some specified place and the kidnappers then give us the info as to where we can find the victim?
Our government really does believe we’re all stupid.
Well, let’s see. We paid for Bergdahl’s release – and it didn’t happen. So, let’s analyze what that means.
1. The
clueless, spineless, and untruthful DC clown kreweAdministration is lying through it’s teeth. Payment for the release of a captive is the definition of a ransom. This demonstrates mendacity. Paying the ransom demonstrates spinelessness.2. The
clueless, spineless, and untruthful DC clown kreweAdministration got taken by either a con man or someone working with Berghdal’s captors (personally, I’m betting on the latter). This demonstrates clueless incompetence.Is anyone surprised that the
clueless, spineless, and untruthful DC clown kreweAdministration was simultaneously cluelessly incompetent, spineless, and mendacious here? I’m certainly not.“The Pentagon’s spin on the payment is that the money was not technically a ransom. Instead, defense officials are claiming the cash was intelligence money paid to a source for information that would lead to the release of Sgt. Bergdahl.”
As strange as it sounds, I get the distinction the White House makes. I’m in the business and I’ve spent those funds for various reasons. Legally, I think the argument carries some weight.
FrostyCWO: ever heard the phrase “plausible deniability”? Except here, the claim is so transparently bogus it’s hard to call it “plausible”.
No, that BS carries no weight. No more weight than than the BS about how their transfer of the Taliban version of the the joint chiefs of staff to Bahrain was somehow legal.
http://www.npr.org/2014/08/22/342335099/gao-bergdahl-exchange-violated-law
I don’t know if Obama’s 12 SCOTUS unanimous decisions against him is a record for all Presidents. I’m sure it’s a record in the category of “Presidents who claim to have taught constitutional law” to have lost that many Supreme Court cases in which not one of his own leftist appointees could find it within themselves to make excuses for this national embarrassment.
But President Obama and his army of Jonathan Grubers are shameless. They can’t be be embarrassed.
They are all, white and black or whatever amount of melatonin is in between, male and female, monkeys flinging their own poo at the wall trying to see what sticks. They have long ago forfeited any benefit of the doubt.
Kindly point out where Congress appropriated this money for this “intelligence” operation.
You know what we should have done?
We should have had the meeting, and traded the prisoners and the money.
Then, as Johnny Taliban is walking away, one of the Delta boys lights the asshole of one of them up with an IR beam, and waits for a 2000-pound JDAM to make a beautiful little crater where the illegal combatants were moving.
That’s the kind of prisoner trade I’d make.
Are we sure that DoD wasn’t just paying them off to keep him for all these years?
Just a thought since who’d want that scumbag anywhere on US Soil.
Speaking of which, WTF is up with that investigation report that everyone’s been waiting on them releasing?