‘WH advisors definitely thought this would ingratiate the WH with pro-defense people. When it blows up they sit looking stupit.
WH advisors are not too bright. Sneaky, so they do some clever tricks, but they also blunder in a big way. Too many lies on top of lies, I would guess, and Harvard types can’t figure that out. They think they’re smart enough to keep all the stories straight.’
Good analysis. None of them are very bright—& please put Obama at the top of that list. You just know he never anticipated the Benghazi backlash. As the situation was developing, you just know he had no idea it was anything special. It’s been said that he tossed off the comment, ‘Do what you can to help them’, or some such casual I-don’t-really-care-I’ve-got-better-things-to-do buck-passing remark. We don’t know what he did next. Perhaps he went to bed. Maybe he watched ESPN. Maybe he was enjoying a bit of ‘strange’, as they used to call adultery in the old days. All we know is that he was detached & likely didn’t see any problem with that.
Now, after enduring years of criticism, the shallow man feels he ‘understands the military’. I.e.: he grabbed hold of one phrase: ‘we leave no man behind’. So he figures he will win big by ‘rescuing’ Bergdahl. He’ll erase his horrible Benghazi PR by being a hero to a ‘captured’ soldier.
Like they say, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. The warrior mindset is so alien to him, he couldn’t grasp it if he spent a decade embedded with the troops. His Bergdahl antic blew up like a live g r e n a d e, rolling across the floor to its unintended target. & Obama has learned nothing. He’s just angry [I should say, ‘even angrier’] at the troops for not realizing he ‘left no man behind’. He really is that thick.
Ø’s mad because someone spoke back and challenged his authoritay.