Greenwald uses Bergdahl to hit Obama, Democrats

[ProSense]

64. The OP

"Greenwald's piece wasn't about Bergdahl. It WAS about the President's ability to release prisoners from Gitmo without Congressional Approval.

For 5 years, the President has insisted that he cannot release prisoners from GITMO without Congressional Approval.
NOW he has done so."

...is correct in that he was using Bergdahl's release.

As I said above, the two situations aren't analagous. One is a negotiated release in his role as CIC. I mean, Greenwald using the illegal claim is ridiculous if he actually believes that Obama has the power to simply release them.

By that logic, releasing the Uighurs or the other detainees to Uruguay is illegal because the others aren't released.

The argument is ridiculous because it's based on the premise that Obama can simply release them. It also ignores that in addition to Congressional obstruction, one of the other sticking points is ensuring that they will not be tortured by the country to which they're released.

As for this comment by Greenwald:

Obama defenders seem to have two choices here: either the president broke the law in releasing these five detainees, or Congress cannot bind the commander-in-chief’s power to transfer detainees when he wants, thus leaving Obama free to make those decisions himself. Which is it?

...again, his entire point is hitting out at Obama and "defenders."

He is basically setting this action up as illegal because the other detainees weren't released, which is ludicrous.