Continuing Developments in Story of Bowe #Bergdahl Treason-Terror Exchange

Check Louise Mensch on Twitter, and Twitchy.

@southsalem @AmPowerBlog thank you both for keeping it alive, and making the American heroes of this story into individuals
— Louise Mensch (@LouiseMensch) June 2, 2014

And of course I'll have more later.

We Lost Soldiers in the Hunt for #Bergdahl, a Guy Who Walked Off in the Dead of Night

A first-hand account, from Nathan Bradley Bethea, at the Daily Beast:

For five years, soldiers have been forced to stay silent about the disappearance and search for Bergdahl. Now we can talk about what really happened.

Well, Good to Know Charli Carpenter Still Has a Girly Crush on the Donalde

I'm tickled pink, I'll tell you!

Old Charli's back at LGM, "Happy Anniversary, LGM. I Miss You."

And she writes, and mentions moi, surreptitiously:

I have two sets of thoughts which I’ve been developing in the context of recent professional debates about academic blogging.

One is about how different strategies of academic blogging affect the way that scholars blend our academic hats with our other other identities / ways of thinking / emoting / deliberating. We vary in how we do this across venues and time. A common strategy for political scientists – I’ll call this Strategy A – is to blog on politics almost entirely as academics, which is to say we bring academic expertise to bear on political problems – in the way, for example, that SEK brings filmography expertise to bear on my understanding of Game of Thrones. By and large this is what the Monkey Cage does: its authors engage with policy problems and current events by articulating what empirical social science has to say about the causal logics underlying policy problems, proposals or debates rather than primarily expressing political opinions. Of course not all academic expertise is empirical and political theory and philosophy can also be usefully brought to bear on debate, but you get my point.

But academic bloggers do other things as well. We sometimes blog, as academics, on politics directly – that is, we sometimes blog to take partisan positions in political debates affecting national or foreign policy, using our credentials as academics to lend an air of authority to what are essentially personal opinions. This is what a certaine right-winge bloggere who shall not be namede does almost exclusively, for example. Many academic bloggers on the left as well do it at least some of the time; I certainly have. Academics also blog on the politics of academia. A lot of this goes on at the Duck: we generally think of it as a subset of academic blogging but I actually think it is a subset of political blogging because our positions on things tend to be more openly partisan and prescriptive when dealing with our profession than we often allow them to be when dealing as social scientists with the explanatory relationships underpinning national/foreign policy...

Lots more at the link, but for those out of the loop, see Charli's 2010 post, "There Goes My Dreame."

Oh, and I don't much care about lending "an air of authority" to my blogging. Frankly, I'd rather people not know I'm a professor, lest I get too many more attacks like this one here, and this one as well.

And ICYMI, "Dr. Charli Carpenter and the Laws of War."

China Touts Power in East Asia

Chinese GDP per capita is still a tiny fraction of America's, but hey, perhaps they've got the mojo.

At the Wall Street Journal, "China Military Official Blasts U.S. 'Hegemony' at Shangri-La Conference: Hagel Accuses Beijing of 'Destabilizing, Unilateral Actions'."

How Legal Education is Changing

From Glenn Reynolds, at the University of Tennessee College of Law, "Legal Education: It’s Not Like ‘The Paper Chase’ Anymore":

Now more than forty years old, the movie The Paper Chase—and the hit television series that it spun off—still embodies the way many people think of legal education. But for better or worse those days are long gone. Today’s law students have to deal with a world in which legal education is more expensive—and high-paying jobs are scarcer—than they were back then. That’s also putting a lot of pressure on law schools.

The movie opens with an enormous classroom, holding a large number of students anxiously awaiting the arrival of Professor Kingsfield, who proceeds to perform what he calls “brain surgery” using no more than Socratic dialogue and a chalkboard. The students are anxious to make good grades, because with good grades they can get jobs at big law firms on Wall Street and elsewhere, where the pay is high and making partner is a guarantee of lucrative lifetime employment.

Today, most of that has changed...

Keep reading.

Obama Announcement on New E.P.A. Regs to Cut Carbon Emissions by 30 Percent

I posted on this yesterday, "Obama's Last Gasp on Global Warming."

Just wanted to remind folks of the president's promise to bankrupt the coal industry:

Let me sort of describe my overall policy.

What I’ve said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else’s out there.

I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year.

So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.

That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches.

The only thing I’ve said with respect to coal, I haven’t been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it.  So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can.

It’s just that it will bankrupt them.

More at Bloomberg, "Obama Said to Propose Deep Cuts to Power-Plant Emissions":

Plants that burn coal to generate electricity account for about 75 percent of all power-plant emissions. Coal, the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel, provides about 40 percent of the U.S. power. While that’s down from about half, coal is remains the single largest source of electricity generation in the U.S.

The proposed rules are among policies “designed to drive out low-cost electricity and replace it with higher-cost, more expensive and less reliable electricity,” Hal Quinn, chief executive officer of the National Mining Association, said yesterday on ABC’s “This Week” program.

The EPA is counting on coal plants being operated more efficiently and states shifting to natural gas from coal to get modest cuts in the next four or five years, people familiar with it said. Each state will have a target based on its emissions, and in the next decade the overall electric grid will need to become more efficient and use renewable generation to achieve the reductions, they said.

“President Obama is right to take decisive action to combat this clear and present danger,” Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, said by e-mail. “The proposed standards will limit -- for the first time in U.S. history -- the unrestricted pollution of our atmosphere by carbon dioxide.”

The Obama Paradox

A dishy piece from Carrie Budoff Brown and Jennifer Epstein, at Politico.

And at Twitchy, "Politico report: Coordination between White House and Congress ‘has never been better’."

And that goes for the relaxation, too:

Obama golfed in FL during Ukraine crisis. Told friends: “I needed this. I needed the golf. I needed to laugh." http://t.co/OGc95oHRzo

— Jennifer Epstein (@jeneps) June 2, 2014

'We’re up against evil like I've never seen in my life...'

It's Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson, speaking at the Republican Leadership Conference, via the Blaze, "‘We’re Up Against Evil’: ‘Duck Dynasty’ Star Phil Robertson Blasts White House, Tells GOP to ‘Get Godly’."

The Case Against Obama's #Bergdahl Deal

Actually, I think by now we've heard the case against this monstrous, politically-expedient terror swap, but here's Ilya Somin, at Volokh Conspiracy, in any case, "The case against the Obama administration’s deal exchanging five high-ranking Taliban leaders for one captured US soldier [Updated]."

And ICYMI, "Uncle Jimbo on #BergdahlTraitor."

Fellow Soldiers Call Bowe #Bergdahl a Deserter, Not a Hero

From Jake Tapper, at CNN, via Louise Mensch:

Very surprised, but very encouraged, to see CNN actually reporting on the deeply squirrelly #BergdahlTraitor case http://t.co/XHG9iZ2m1c

— Louise Mensch (@LouiseMensch) June 2, 2014

The sense of pride expressed by officials of the Obama administration at the release of Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is not shared by many of those who served with him -- veterans and soldiers who call him a deserter whose "selfish act" ended up costing the lives of better men.

"I was pissed off then and I am even more so now with everything going on," said former Sergeant Matt Vierkant, a member of Bergdahl's platoon when he went missing on June 30, 2009. "Bowe Bergdahl deserted during a time of war and his fellow Americans lost their lives searching for him."

Vierkant said Bergdahl needs to not only acknowledge his actions publicly but face a military trial for desertion under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

A reporter asked Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel Sunday whether Bergdahl had left his post without permission or deserted -- and, if so, whether he would be punished. Hagel didn't answer directly. "Our first priority is assuring his well-being and his health and getting him reunited with his family," he said. "Other circumstances that may develop and questions, those will be dealt with later."

Following his release from five years of captivity in Afghanistan on Saturday, Bergdahl was transferred to a military hospital in Germany....

According to first-hand accounts from soldiers in his platoon, Bergdahl, while on guard duty, shed his weapons and walked off the observation post with nothing more than a compass, a knife, water, a digital camera, and a diary.

At least six soldiers were killed in subsequent searches for Bergdahl, and many soldiers in his platoon said attacks seemed to increase against the United States in Paktika Provice in the days and weeks following his disappearance.

Many of Bergdahl's fellow troops -- from the seven or so who knew him best in his squad, to the larger group that comprised the 1st Battalion, 501st Infantry Regiment, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 25th Infantry Division -- told CNN that they signed nondisclosure agreements agreeing to never share any information about Bergdahl's disappearance and the efforts to recapture him. Some were willing to dismiss that document in hopes that the truth would come out about a soldier who they now fear is being hailed as a hero, while the men who lost their lives looking for him are ignored.

Many are flocking to social media, such as the Facebook page "Bowe Bergdahl is NOT a hero," where they share stories detailing their resentment. A number of comments on his battalion's Facebook page prompted the moderator to ask for more respect to be shown.

"I challenge any one of you who label him a traitor to spend 5 years in captivity with the Taliban or Haqqani, then come back and accuse him again. Whatever his intent when he walked away or was captured, he has more than paid for it."

Emails reported by the late Michael Hastings in Rolling Stone in 2012 reveal what Bergdahl's fellow infantrymen learned within days of his disappearance: he told people that he no longer supported the U.S. effort in Afghanistan.

"The future is too good to waste on lies," Bowe wrote to his parents. "And life is way too short to care for the damnation of others, as well as to spend it helping fools with their ideas that are wrong. I have seen their ideas and I am ashamed to even be American. The horror of the self-righteous arrogance that they thrive in. It is all revolting."

Bergdahl wrote to them, "I am sorry for everything. The horror that is America is disgusting."

CNN has not independently verified the authenticity of the emails.

More.

Rhian Sugden for Zoo Today

A lovely video, "Rhian Sugden's on-set teaser video!"

Added: "Rhian Sugden Archive - All of Her Strip Pictures and Videos Galleries!"

Photo Roundup #Rule5

At Theo's, "Pic Dump..."



BONUS: At 90 Miles From Tyranny, "Blogs With Rule 5 Links."

John McCain Questions Swap of 'Highest High-Risk People' for #BergdahlTraitor

At CBS News.

Trading With the Taliban — #Bergdahl

From the editors, at the Wall Street Journal:

The return of Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl from the clutches of the Taliban is cause for relief for his family and all Americans. But there's no denying that the price of his recovery is high. The Obama Administration swapped five of the hardest cases at Guantanamo in a fashion that will encourage terrorists to kidnap more Americans to win the release of more prisoners.

This does not mean we agree with Republicans who say President Obama broke the law by failing to inform Congress 30 days in advance of the prisoner release from Gitmo. Presidential power is never stronger than in the role of Commander in Chief. Congress did not attempt to use its comparably strong power of the purse. Instead Congress's Gitmo language sought bluntly to constrain Mr. Obama's wartime decision-making.

This is unconstitutional, as the President averred in a statement at the time he signed the bill. That Mr. Obama—and his liberal friends—denounced George W. Bush for similar signing statements is one more antiterror irony of this Presidency. Readers should watch to see if the same politicians and newspapers that assailed Mr. Bush are more forgiving when their kind of President is using the same war powers.

The real problem with this prisoner swap is the message it conveys about American weakness, especially in the context of Mr. Obama's retreat from Afghanistan and elsewhere. The world's bad actors have long perceived that the U.S. doesn't negotiate over hostages, in contrast to, say, France or Italy. This has made American soldiers and civilians less promising targets.

The Taliban swap will change that perception and increase the likelihood that more Americans will be grabbed, not least in Kabul. Don't be surprised if 9/11 plotter Khalid Sheikh Mohammed shows up on a list of future prisoner-swap demands...

Keep reading.

Uncle Jimbo on #BergdahlTraitor

I checked over there early this morning, and now here's this, at Black Five, "Big Problems With Bergdahl Deal":

The problems with the deal we made is not the worthiness of Bergdahl, but the price we paid and the timing of the deal. We are releasing five of the most heinous and senior Taliban leaders we ever captured. Men with the blood of hundreds of US troops on their hands who will spend the rest of their lives adding to that toll. They are unrepentant, barbarian killers and the Afghan people we are supposed to have been helping all these years will pay the price when these men rejoin the resurgent Taliban. We are packing our things and loading planes to come home and the Talibs have known this since Obama unveiled his faux surge at West Point in 2009. He announced more troops were coming and he announced that those same troops would be leaving prior to his next election campaign. The Taliban plays the long war and they knew they could wait us out and they did.

If you want to know just how bad these five are, go read this and then weep for the innocents who will pay the price for their discharge. All the prisoners we still hold at Gitmo are evil terrorists who will perpetrate more evil given the slightest opportunity. Well we just handed it to these five and they will use it to undo any semblance of good we did in Afghanistan. This is not just a possibility; it is the undeniable reality of the deal we made. There is also a good possibility that the Haqqani network, who were holding him, may have picked up a number of satchels full of cash in the exchange as well. They are essentially a crime syndicate and money talks with them. It is just not something we should be involved in doing, hence the Qataris involvement.

The next point is why now? This deal has been on the table for several years. The Taliban proposed it and we could have agreed to it at any point. Why let Bergdahl rot for years if this was an option? The simplest answer is that this is and was a horrible deal that never should have been made. As much as it pains me to say, the life of one American POW is not worth the certain deaths of the hundreds or thousands who will die at the hands of the scum we have just unleashed. Those are the tough decisions and calculations that the Commander in Chief should weigh. We cannot pay any cost to regain a prisoner, because some costs are just too high. This was one of those times.

Be sure to read the whole thing.

Can't wait for Bergdahl's trial.

'Collective Amnesia' in China 25 Years After Tiananmen Square Massacre

A great piece, at the Los Angeles Times, "Collective amnesia prevails in China 25 years after Tiananmen Square."

The Chinese Communist Party maintains a brutal regime, but economic development and the loosening of social restraints have "bought off" mass unrest.

Plus, a video at Telegraph UK, "Tiananmen Square massacre: Communist Party still dares not publish the truth."

Obama White House Defends #Bergdahl Prisoner Exchange

At the New York Times, "Administration Defends Swap With Taliban to Free U.S. Soldier":

WASHINGTON — Top Obama administration officials pushed back on Sunday against Republican criticism that a deal freeing the last American held prisoner in Afghanistan could allow dangerous Taliban leaders to return to the fight, might encourage terrorist groups to seize American hostages and possibly violated a law requiring notification of Congress.

Susan E. Rice, the president’s national security adviser, spoke a day after years of fitful negotiations had finally yielded the release in Afghanistan of the prisoner, Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl. The deal, brokered with Qatari help, also freed five high-level Taliban members from the prison camp at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

The release of the Taliban officials was sharply assailed by Republicans, including Representative Mike Rogers of Michigan, chairman of the intelligence committee, as a dangerous transgression of longstanding policy against negotiating with terror groups.

“If you negotiate here, you’ve sent a message to every Al Qaeda group in the world — by the way, some who are holding U.S. hostages today — that there is some value now in that hostage in a way that they didn’t have before,” Mr. Rogers said on the CNN program “State of the Union.” He added, “That is dangerous.”

More.

Susan Rice at ABC News is here, "Ambassador Susan Rice on Release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl."

And previously, "Rep. Mike Rogers on #Bergdahl: 'We Have Now Set a Price' on American Lives (VIDEO)."

Bras Are Optional

At Social Hype, "(40 Sensational Pictures)." (Via Linkiest.)

BONUS: At the Other McCain, "Rule 5 Sunday: Pre-Vegas Review," and at Pirate's, "Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup."

Obama's Last Gasp on Global Warming

We had negative 1 percent economic growth in the first quarter, but damned if destroying the economy isn't the last thing he does.

At the Los Angeles Times, "New EPA rule seeks to cut carbon emissions 30% by 2030."

And at the New York Times, "Using Executive Powers, Obama Begins His Last Big Push on Climate Policy":

WASHINGTON — All but giving up on Congress, President Obama has spent the year foraging for issues he could tackle on his own, and largely coming up with minor executive orders. But on Monday, he will unveil a plan to take on climate change that may be his last, most sweeping effort to remake America in his remaining time in office...

Remembering D-Day: The Most Brilliantly Conducted Invasion in Military History

From VDH, at National Review, "D-Day at 70":

Seventy years ago this June 6, the Americans, British, and Canadians stormed the beaches of Normandy in the largest amphibious invasion of Europe since the Persian king Xerxes invaded Greece in 480 b.c.

About 160,000 troops landed on five Normandy beaches and linked up with airborne troops in a masterly display of planning and courage. Within a month, almost a million Allied troops had landed in France and were heading eastward toward the German border. Within eleven months the war with Germany was over.

The western front required the diversion of hundreds of thousands of German troops. It weakened Nazi resistance to the Russians while robbing the Third Reich of its valuable occupied European territory.

The impatient and long-suffering Russians had demanded of their allies a second front commensurate with their own sacrifices. Their Herculean efforts by war’s end would account for two out of every three dead German soldiers — at a cost of 20 million Russian civilian and military casualties.

Yet for all the sacrifices of the Soviet Union, Joseph Stalin was largely responsible for his war with Nazi Germany. In 1939, he signed a foolish non-aggression pact with Hitler that allowed the Nazis to gobble up Western democracies. Hitler’s Panzers were aided by Russians in Poland and overran Western Europe fueled by supplies from the Soviets.

The Western Allies had hardly been idle before D-Day. They had taken North Africa and Sicily from the Germans and Italians. They were bogged down in brutal fighting in Italy. The Western Allies and China fought the Japanese in the Pacific, Burma, and China.

The U.S. and the British Empire fought almost everywhere. They waged a multiform war on and under the seas. They eventually destroyed Japanese and German heavy industry with a costly and controversial strategic-bombing campaign.

The Allies sent friends such as the Russians and Chinese billions of dollars worth of food and war matériel.

In sum, while Russia bore the brunt of the German land war, the Western Allies fought all three Axis powers everywhere else and in every conceivable fashion.

Yet if D-Day was brilliantly planned and executed, the follow-up advance through France in June 1944 was not always so...

A whole 'nother era.

More at the link.