Should the Congress have been notified before the prisoner transfer to secure the release of SGT Bergdahl?

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 31 May 2014 22:42:12 -0400

The law requires Congressional notification.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made May 31 at 2014 10:44 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 31 May 2014 22:44:33 -0400

Sir,
Is there anything showing/anyone complaining they were'nt notified? I'm just curious.

Response by CW3 Private RallyPoint Member made May 31 at 2014 10:46 PM

CW3 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 31 May 2014 22:46:27 -0400

Sir,
Is there anything showing/anyone complaining they were'nt notified? I'm just curious.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 31 at 2014 11:03 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 31 May 2014 23:03:14 -0400

Sir- I'm going to have to say yes simply because it's the law. I seriously doubt anyone would have objected.

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made May 31 at 2014 11:04 PM

SGM Matthew Quick — Sat, 31 May 2014 23:04:02 -0400

No...just another bureaucratic hoop to jump through and MANY of our 'representatives' would have been asking, "What's in it for me for my state?"

Response by MSG Wade Huffman made May 31 at 2014 11:11 PM

MSG Wade Huffman — Sat, 31 May 2014 23:11:12 -0400

So, if I understand correctly, the law says congress must be notified, and the law was broken... not surprised, doubt anyone else is either. Bottom line, SGT Bergdahl is safe. The legal issue can be worked out later... can't really go back in time.

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 1 at 2014 12:05 AM

PO1 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 01 Jun 2014 00:05:41 -0400

What is this "law" thing you speak of sir? It sounds like a strange alien technology and too advanced for our civilization....

Response by SSG Laureano Pabon made Jun 4 at 2014 9:08 AM

SSG Laureano Pabon — Wed, 04 Jun 2014 09:08:30 -0400

Yes Sir, Congress should have been (Re-Informed of the release, before taking the current actions), according to the President Congress was informed sometime back about this so Congress was fully aware of it.
But I don't think Congress was aware of which 5 prisoners were going to be traded for SGT Bergdahls release.

Response by SFC Matthew Parker made Jun 4 at 2014 9:24 AM

SFC Matthew Parker — Wed, 04 Jun 2014 09:24:21 -0400

No, the "law" as it exists is not enforceable, encroaches on the Presidents authority as Commander in Chief and would have been a security violation waiting to happen.
Are we supposed to tell a mother I'm sorry but we didn't get permission from Congress when we had the opportunity to get your son/daughter back? I'm sorry Mrs. Jones your son was killed in the middle of the rescue, turns out the aide for congressmen Jackas told the press and it leaked.
This is a ridicules provision in a law designed to prevent the closure of Gitmo and I hope this highlights the political nonsense of this congress.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2014 11:57 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Jun 2014 11:57:46 -0400

The law may states that, but the President was right in not alerting Congress for the simple fact if he had told one of our representatives, not singling out a specific Congressman/woman or Senator whether it be Democrat or Republican, someone would have found a microphone. Now whether that individual would have hinted towards the deal or blew the whistle about deal doesnt matter. But I definitely think if he [POTUS] had alerted Congress about the deal then things would have been extremely complicated.

Plus I think that decision really fell under the premise of the inherent right of the President. There are some situations that require only the President's call. Negotiating with terrorists to get your man back; no matter how much I don't like it, it still falls on the President, because at the end of the day, he still has to make the decision on whether to go or not.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2014 1:59 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Jun 2014 13:59:50 -0400

Sir,

No they shouldn't. the POTUS had to make a call and he made it. Bring all the Service Members home. Congress takes to long to act on anything.

Response by LCDR William Rouch made Jun 4 at 2014 2:19 PM

LCDR William Rouch — Wed, 04 Jun 2014 14:19:23 -0400

POTUS should have notified Congress of the transfer. It is obvious he wanted to chalk it up as a victory but did not do a thorough check of SGT Bergdahl's AWOL/desertion circumstances. Question now is what will or if the Convening Authority chaerge or will this quietly diappear off the radar.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2014 4:34 PM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Jun 2014 16:34:04 -0400

Hard to say not knowing the particulars but I would LOVE to know why we suddenly decide to negotiate with known terrorists.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2014 4:35 PM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Jun 2014 16:35:29 -0400

AND, I would like to know if a committee of Congress were notified.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2014 5:10 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Jun 2014 17:10:42 -0400

My answer is yes because it's the law.

We have lost our balance of power in the Federal government with the Commander in Chief now able to start wars and violate other laws. This is not a new issue it has been going back 100 years.

Response by SFC Thomas Skinner made Jun 4 at 2014 7:36 PM

SFC Thomas Skinner — Wed, 04 Jun 2014 19:36:44 -0400

It is the law, they should have been notified. Regardless weither or not they were notified we just gave the taliban a great victory and ruined any progress we have made in the last 10 years of war in Afghanistan. They now have a great boost in morale, a win over the United States for recruiting propaganda and five of their top leaders back to plan and execute future attacks on our Soldiers and possibly our own soil again. If they wanted to get Bergdahl back they should have sent in a Special Ops team and extracted him by force, they found binladin, they could have found him too. I truly believe this is going to bite us in the a$$ down the road.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 4 at 2014 10:52 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 04 Jun 2014 22:52:40 -0400

As many of you have stated, it is a law (wether enforceable or not) it is still a law. POTUS should have notified Congress. IF and I use the word IF they were required to be notified and were deliberately not notified, then we get into that realm of "well I don't fell like following this rule or law" I'm just going to over look it and where does it stop, who decides which laws can and will be sidestepped. If we cant trust our CinC to obey the rule of law, how can we expect others to follow the law?

As a caveat to this, it has been said that the Art 2 of the Constitution gives the President the right to act unilaterally if circumstances warrant then there is NO legal issue. However he doesn't have to justify that to us in the military, but will to Congress.

But speaking as a private citizen I would want to know that my elected leader is following the law and that he/she wasn't just picking and choosing.

Response by SGT Richard H. made Aug 1 at 2014 9:43 AM

SGT Richard H. — Fri, 01 Aug 2014 09:43:58 -0400

Laws about notification of Congress aside, what happened to "WE-DO-NOT-NEGOTIATE-WITH -TERRORISTS" ??