Is Terrorism Overwhelming the Obama Administration?
By: Bill O'ReillyJanuary 28, 2015
Archive
Comment
Email
Print
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Former Defense Intelligence Agency Chief Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn slammed the White House for not having a strategy to fight the jihad.  Also for refusing to use the term, "Islamic militants."

General Flynn said, "You cannot defeat an enemy you do not admit exists."

Flynn, who worked for President Obama, now joins a host of other former Obama officials in telling the world the administration has no plan to defeat Islamic terrorism.

And that's true.  Talking Points has been chronicling that for months.

Here's the latest:

Ten Democratic senators are now telling President Obama that if there is no progress in the Iran nuke negotiations by March, they will join with Republicans in embarrassing him by passing sanctions.

Iran is the centerpiece of this terror war.  If that nation gets a nuclear weapon, the jihad gains incredible power.

Remember the Iranian mullahs want to spread the Shia brand of Islam and they also want to destroy Israel and the United States.

The mullahs, as well as other Islamic fanatics, believe Barack Obama is a weak leader.

No question.

And then there is the Bowe Bergdahl situation again tied into the jihad.

As you know, Sgt. Bergdahl was traded for five top Taliban terrorists back in May of last year

These men will most likely return to the battlefield to fight against America.

Meantime, Bergdahl apparently left the battlefield, deserting his unit in Afghanistan.

Right now Sgt. Bergdahl is at Fort Sam Houston in Texas awaiting his fate.

The Army interviewed the sergeant back in August, and by all accounts its investigation has been completed for months.

Yet there is no definition.

The Factor broke a story earlier this week that says the White House is pressuring the Pentagon to go easy on Bergdahl.

And that is why General Mark Milley has not reported back to we the people.

Lt. Colonel Tony Shaffer says the Army has come to the conclusion that Bergdahl did indeed desert. 

The Army denies that but Shaffer is standing by his story, which has also been reported by NBC News.

But here is the nuance -- there are different kinds of desertion and that is giving the Army some wiggle room.

The White House desperately does not want a trial where members of Bergdahl's unit would testify that he put their lives in danger.

We've already heard that on television.

So President Obama would prefer that Bergdahl be charged with going AWOL -- absent without leave.

Then he could be quietly punished with no big exposition.

But the facts show that Bergdahl did desert his unit, was captured by the Taliban in Afghanistan and held for five years by them.

The sane way to do this is to charge Bergdahl with desertion.

And then on humanitarian grounds the president would pardon him.

But the sergeant would lose back pay and be dishonorably discharged.

That's what should happen.

And there's more: the military is not supposed to be influenced by politics.

The Pentagon is apolitical.

But Colonel Shaffer reports politics is influencing the Bergdahl situation.

If that is true, we the people need to know about it.

Bottom line: Talking Points believes the Army knows exactly what Bergdahl did and is stonewalling the process.

As always, I could be wrong.

And that's the memo.

High Bar Shirt Co.