“The Fixer” (left) and “Skippy” (right) have screwed the pooch on this Bergdahl fiasco.

TV Pundits are stuck in a pre-Obama political paradigm of opinion delivery as they proclaim the White House “had to know” the controversial issues surrounding Bowe Bergdahl prior to using him as a prop to turn around the opinion and polling of a failing Obama presidency.

“They can’t be that niave” is another favorite.   “Surely they had to know this would (__fill_in_blank__)”… etc.

Um, well, actually yes, yes they are *THAT* disconnected.    Yes, they actually did anticipate the Bergdahl release creating a national euphoria of patriotism and celebration.

Yes, they actually saw this as being another big effen’ deal – only they thought it would be a positive one.  No, they did not see this coming.

Those who think otherwise either do not, or have not, followed this White House communications team well enough.  (Looking at you David Gergen)

This is exactly typical of what happens when you rush to create paper mache’ stage props for your show without checking the weather in advance.

It rains.

Sometimes, it pours.

Denis McDonough/Valerie Jarrett/Ben Rhodes Inc. did not vet the paper narrative they were building, nor consider the consequences if it fell apart.    This “team” is used to getting by on Cliff Notes, they skip the actual research substance and only request other people’s summaries.

In this example the even more comical aspect is how they drove the bus over Hillary’s White House liaison/protector John “skippy” Podesta with the poorly constructed scheme.

The aforementioned team, sans Podesta, did the same thing with their Benghazi narrative when they built the paper mache’ talking points before the gunfire even stopped on the CIA compound.    Hence, after the exit of Hillary from the administration she needed someone inside to look out for her interests.  Enter Podesta.

The dynamic is so brutally obvious it’s almost funny how the media seem so oblivious to it.

When you build your narratives using political paper mache’ as the substance for the image you are creating, the factual rain does not afford you any long term maintenance options when it starts to come down.

Subsequently, you end up desperately trying to patch up something not designed to withstand the elements.    Eventually the least bad option is just to try and save face.

Consider Hillary’s position on Monday and Tuesday;  she was in full alignment with the White House stage craft:

At an event in Denver Clinton was asked her opinion of the deal, which has come under scrutiny for everything from Bergdahl’s potential deserter status at the time of his capture to the legality of the Obama administration’s decision not to inform Congress thirty days ahead of a prisoner swap.

Noting that U.S. allies have made similar deals, Clinton said, “This young man, whatever the circumstances, was an American citizen — is an American citizen — was serving in our military. The idea that you really care for your own citizens and particularly those in uniform, I think is a very noble one.”

“You don’t want to see these five prisoners go back to combat,” Clinton said. “There’s a lot that you don’t want to have happen. On the other hand you also don’t want an American citizen, if you can avoid it, especially a solider, to die in captivity.  (link)

Then, whoopsie… the factual rain begins to fall.

Bergdahl is a deserter?  His father is a devout Muslim and sympathetic to the Taliban?   Brave U.S. soldiers died trying to rescue him – ultimately from himself ?   We gave up 5 of the worst terrorist leaders to get him ?  The terrorists enjoyed a warm homecoming in Qatar upon arrival ?……  And,… wait for it….  Obama broke the law by not notifying congress of his intent?

The rah, rah, narrative quickly collapses into a universally panned bad idea…. even by fellow Democrats….. YIKES !

Now what ?

Quick, whip up the Kerry-esque spin.   Let’s make her against it, before she was for it:

Despite that the White House’s claim this week that the United States did not negotiate “directly” with the Taliban to secure the Bergdahl swap, the State Department, Defense Department, and White House officials did meet several times with Taliban leaders in 2011 and 2012 to discuss the deal. The negotiations, held in in Munich and Doha, fell apart in early 2012. But before they did, Clinton had a framework deal drawn up that was much tougher on the Taliban than what ultimately got done two years later.

Three former administration officials who were involved in the process told The Daily Beast that Clinton was worried about the ability to enforce the deal and disinclined to trust the Taliban or the Haqqani network in Pakistan, which held Bergdahl until this weekend. Clinton was so concerned, the former officials added, that she may not have even signed off if the negotiations had succeeded.

“She was heavily involved from the beginning, she was very skeptical of the arrangement, she was very wary of it,” one former administration official said. “If we had come to some agreement she perhaps would have backed it, but we never got to that point.”  (link)

Shocked.   I’m shocked !

Yes Alice it’s 2014 and *THIS* is the “New Normal”.

Thankfully for this administration they’ve only got to worry about the media – who will totally ignore the obvious, and wunderkins John Boehner and Mitch McConnell who will totally act oblivious.

After all, Orange is the new Black !