One of the quieter stories now is about the use of non-disclosure agreements by Obama Inc. to silence witnesses to its scandals. We've seen an NDA come up in the obstruction of justice by Obama's DOJ of the Uranium One case and by Obama's useful idiots among the brass in the Bergdahl case.
The most basic tenet of my job as the unit spokesman was to be knowledgeable on all critical facts pertaining to the brigade. The Bergdahl story was the biggest annual recurring news event reflecting one of our soldiers. Yet, it took months for me to convince a leader to brief me on the facts associated with it. In the days following Sergeant Bergdahl’s desertion, soldiers with knowledge of the facts were forced to sign nondisclosure agreements. The truth about Sergeant Bergdahl was suppressed at the cost of their peace of mind.
Though it was common knowledge inside the unit that Sergeant Bergdahl had deserted, the Army allowed the myth to perpetuate that he might have fallen behind on a patrol. Soldiers who knew the truth were afraid to speak up, out of fear that they would be punished.
Why force soldiers to sign NDAs?
You could blame a standard cover-up. Organizations don't like looking bad. And a deserter is certainly not a feather in anyone's cap.
But then we fast forward to that Obama press conference and Bergdahl's father getting his, "Allahu Akbar" on. The writer of the article views that as an attempt to compensate for the VA scandal. I'm sure that didn't hurt. But it seemed as if Bergdahl and his father were rather sympatico with Obama's worldview. Obama showed rather little interest in some American hostages. But Bergdahl remained a major priority. Not only did his release allow Obama to free more Islamic terrorists from Gitmo (a majority priority for his administration to the extent that he fired one Secretary of Defense and terrorized another for not going along quickly enough) but it allowed him to parade collaborators as heroes. And that's the core of the cover-up.