@revelette2,
You'll need to ask Rolling Stone. They reported on the e-mail he is said to have sent to his parents. It's possible that the parents contacted Rolling Stone hoping that they would be sympathetic to their son's plight and agreed to share with them his correspondence. That's admittedly just speculation though.
The frequency with which straw men are being raised in this thread is amazing.
With rare exception, the people who are criticizing the White House for this deal and who believe that Bergdahl deserted are not suggesting that it would have been better if he were left to rot in Taliban captivity or that he shouldn't get a fair trial. Contrary to not wanting him tried there is concern that he won't be tried; that any continued investigation will be White House Washed.
I don't know that Mr. Bellinger has broken with Republicans as much as he apparently doesn't agree with some Republicans, and that's perfectly fine.
For reasons I have already presented, I take issue with his conclusion that the US would have had to release the prisoners because the war in Afghanistan was "winding down." I do however agree that they would not have been tried in a US court.
I don't know what the point was of "stressing" that 500 detainees were released when Bush was president unless someone is arguing that it was illegal for Obama to release these five. If one wants to make an argument that people who are asserting that no detainees should have been released under Obama, were OK with releases under Bush are revealing their partisan stripes, that's fine too, however I would appreciate someone identifying those who are making such an assertion. In any case, while I don't necessarily think Bellinger was, suggesting that everyone who has a problem with this deal was fine and dandy with the detainee releases under Bush is a step too far.
Cheney indicating that he would not have approved this deal is not immediately shot down because he was Vice President when 500 detainees were released under Bush. I would agree that Cheney is inclined to find everything Obama does as a failing, but even that doesn't necessarily undermine the integrity of his comment on this deal. Regardless, someone saying they would not have approved this particular deal doesn't mean that they would have left Bergdahl to rot in the hands of the Taliban, unless you buy everything the White House been selling about how this was the absolutely last chance to have him released.
I don't think that Bellinger is taking a position that is dramatically different from other Republicans, but if he is, so what? The source of this article Think Progress certainly thinks its somehow significant and went so far as to mischaracterize what he said as "blasting" the GOP. Somehow I doubt Think Progress would find it particularly dispositive if a former Democrat advisor to President Clinton disagreed around the edges with the White House position.
