Are there any political consequences to the Bergdahl debacle?

The White House doesn’t even appear to be the slightest bit chastened, reflective or even self-aware of its mistakes, despite the fact that Bowe Bergdahl has now been officially charged with desertion and misbehaving before the enemy. Last night on Fox News’s “The Kelly File,” State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said it was “absolutely” worth it to trade the five Taliban prisoners for Bergdahl, even though the White House knew he was probably a deserter when it made the deal. It obviously didn’t care and took the offer the Taliban made.

So, will there be any political fallout from this debacle? Maybe there is a method to the White House madness, because the answer is most likely no. The Democrats in Congress mostly shrug and hide, and the apologists in the media try to escape behind a muscular recitation that “the United States leaves no man behind.” Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton had already made her White House exit by the time the Bergdahl deal was negotiated, so she can plead ignorance, although she told Diane Sawyer that how Bergdahl was “captured” didn’t matter. In the meantime, more jihadists are on the loose, and the world knows we do negotiate with terrorists.