To me, that was overblown, a myth. Standing with his parents to announce his return (which I watched) was basically just that--an announcement--NOT a "ceremony"--about getting him home alive, leave no man behind, we take care of our servicemen, no one is forgotten--that sort of thing--and the Bergdahls had a long personal history with the administration. I don't recall lots of praise for Bergdahl's actions or claims of his heroism during that announcement. Susan Rice defended his record inartfully, but I never saw an organized attempt to portray him as anything other than a soldier who had been rescued. I am critical of Obama at times (more so recently), but that bothered me not at all. They had a right to be happy about it and to expect the rest of America to say, "hey good, our POW made it back". The operation to bring him home was big, complex and dangerous, BTW, and could have gone sideways at any point, so praise and recognition was certainly due those who got him home. The time to dissect his conduct and discipline him was later. But no matter what, the GOP would have attacked like the opportunistic dogs they are.
The Gitmo swap--also overblown. I think 5 Taliban numbnuts, most of whom were administrative officials who were so wily and skillful they got themselves captured ten or more years ago, was not an overly high price--especially considering the outcry that a ransom or a failed hostage rescue with dead/captured special forces would have caused. No one had come up with a better option that both sides could agree to, they weren't even sure he was still alive by December of 2013, and we have greatly reduced our presence in Afghanistan which limits our operating ability--in other words, not a lot of time left. After five years of torment for this guy and his family, how long were negotiations with two terrorist networks and an intermediary country supposed to stretch? Until he was dead?
The anti-Afghan war stuff--that's not me, and that's neither here nor there. I fully understand that desertion is serious, but his mental state and psych/behavioral history will almost certainly be found to have been a factor--a major factor. He sounded delusional and irrational, in Kenneth Dahl's description, and there's no reason to believe that anyone is lying in their testimony.
I think a judicial process and some form of administrative punishment is justified--certainly not prison. The Army bears some responsibility, his commanders and recruiters bear some responsibility, he bears some responsibility. I think that's a fair way to look at it.
= new reply since forum marked as read