Filegate, Travelgate, 9/11 Gate, Clinton/Kerry Advisor in trouble

[Dreadsox]

Unreal.....just unreal.

Sandy Berger, former Clinton advisor and current Kerry advisor, allegedly removed sensative material from the archives in his preparation for the 9/11 commission. These classified forms are still missing and the FBI is searching his home.

Wonderful...I feel better knowing that this guy is on the Kerry team.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto...ap_on_re_us/sept__11_berger_probe_2&printer=1

[Q]Government and congressional officials familiar with the investigation, who spoke only on condition of anonymity because the probe involves classified materials, said the investigation remains active and that no decision has been made on whether Berger should face criminal charges.


The officials said the missing documents were highly classified, and included critical assessments about the Clinton administration's handling of the millennium terror threats as well as identification of America's terror vulnerabilities at airports to sea ports. [/Q]

He claims he threw them away.....

 

[verte76]

Yeah, this is great news. I'd bet it's news to Kerry, too.

 

[BostonAnne]

I find it hard to believe that any documentation in the archives is not backed up/copied. That sounds as silly to me as the thought of the Edge having the only copy of U2's new album stolen.

 

[Dreadsox]

I heard on the radio he made five trips in, and that he removed things five different time.

Why would he do this?
What was in the documents?

I am sorry, but it stinks to high heaven. Maybe I am overreacting, but, something is rotten about this.

 

[BostonAnne]

If these documents were so important, why was he allowed to just walk in and take them? Why weren't copies kept of what he was borrowing to do his report?

 

[verte76]

No, this is not kosher. This is *not* cool. I want to know why he was allowed to just pick up the things myself. That is very strange.

 

[BVS]

I heard today on the radio that the documents in question were memos that several people have access to, so I'm a little confused to what the hell is going on.

 

[Screaming Flower]

he stepped down as kerry's advisor.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=615&e=2&u=/nm/20040720/pl_nm/security_berger_dc

 

[Dreadsox]

I just heard on the news that he was stuffing things in his SOCKS? Anyone else heard this?

 

[BostonAnne]

I heard on the radio he made five trips in, and that he removed things five different time.

Why would he do this?
What was in the documents?

I am sorry, but it stinks to high heaven. Maybe I am overreacting, but, something is rotten about this.

Yeah, it is rotten. The whole thing happened earlier this year - but is hits the press now?

The FBI (news - web sites), executing a warrant, searched Berger's office and home safe earlier this year.


Lanny Breuer, Berger's attorney, said he was told the government was appreciative of Berger's cooperation in the probe. "And then today, a couple of days before the 9/11 commission report comes out, the whole thing gets leaked," he said.

Kerry spokesman Phil Singer said Republican were "playing politics with a criminal investigation" and also questioned the leak of the investigation and the Republican attacks.


"This appears to be a partisan attempt to divert attention away from the 9/11 commission report," Singer said.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=615&e=2&u=/nm/20040720/pl_nm/security_berger_dc

I have an issue with this story being "leaked" if it is such a big deal and known about earlier.

Also, as BonoVoxSupastar pointed out, if others had access to these how do we know for sure that Sandy Berger didn't return them? Sandy Berger is being sited as being cooperative by the government.

 

[Dreadsox]

What on earth could cause someone, with this mans years of experience in Washington, handling national security issues, to do something like this?

Want to bet he lied before congress or the commission about something? What in the world could cause him to stuff his pants and socks with things?

WAS THERE SOMETHING THAT THEY MISSED ABOUT 9/11 THAT THEY FORGOT TO PASS ON TO BUSH BEFORE THEY LEFT OFFICE?

Supposedly the papers had to do with threat assessments.

I do not believe he did it to save Clinton's ass....but he has to be covering up something.

 

[ThatGuy]

Maybe it was the evidence that proved the Clintons killed Vince Foster???!!!

Or maybe they forced Berger to destroy evidence ... or he'd be next!!!1

The mind boggles with the endless conspiracies this could link to.

Let's see where this story is in a week before we get too carried away. The FBI hasn't even interviewed Berger about it, which says to me it's not too big of a deal. Lots of crap is being spread around (documents in his socks? Please.) and it's going to be a while before something approaching the truth comes out.

 

[verte76]

Stuffing stuff in his socks? No, I haven't heard this. Good grief.

 

[anitram]

I saw his lawyer on BBC World and he said how this has been under investigation since last October and never has there been any evidence presented about him stuffing papers in his pants or his socks, etc until it leaked to the press, which is all sorts of bizarre.

Frankly, this entire thing sounds ridiculous to me. Not sure where the truth is, probably somewhere in the middle as usual.

 

[Klaus]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/21/politics/campaign/21berger.html?th

Samuel R. Berger, the former national security adviser to President Bill Clinton, resigned abruptly Tuesday as a senior adviser to John Kerry's presidential campaign after the disclosure that he had improperly removed classified material on terrorism from a secure government reading room last year.

...

"With that in mind, he has decided to step aside as an informal adviser to the Kerry campaign until this matter is resolved," said Lanny A. Breuer, a lawyer representing Mr. Berger in the investigation.

...

Mr. Berger's aides acknowledged that when he was preparing last year for testimony before the Sept. 11 commission, he removed from a secure reading room copies of a handful of classified documents related to a failed 1999 terrorist plot to bomb the Los Angeles airport. Republicans accused him on Tuesday of stashing the material in his clothing, but Mr. Breuer called that accusation "ridiculous" and politically inspired. He said the documents' removal was accidental.

Mr. Breuer, the lawyer, said Mr. Berger inadvertently put three or four versions of the report on the plots in a leather portfolio he had with him. "He had lots of papers, and the memos got caught up in the portfolio," he said. "It was an accident."

Mr. Berger also put in his jacket and pants pockets handwritten notes that he had made during his review of the documents, Mr. Breuer said.

Officials at the National Archives realized late last year that several documents were missing and turned the matter over to the F.B.I., which later searched Mr. Berger's home and office, officials said. Mr. Breuer said that Mr. Berger had returned two of the documents, but that he had apparently discarded several others inadvertently.

 

[elfyx]

There is a full-out war between factions within our intelligence communities and other government agencies.

This surfaces in the media, which has long since been spy-riddled. Manipulation of public opionion and reaction is part of the game.

This is very dirty.

 

[verte76]

Yeah, I've read stuff in the press about all of the disputes going on in the intelligence community. It's very dirty. Ugh. I hate dirty politics.

 

[Salome]

such professionalism

 

[deep]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-berger22jul22,1,1689396,print.story?coll=la-news-comment-editorials

The Berger Smoke Screen

July 22, 2004

There is not much to rue about the departure of Clinton-era national security advisor Sandy Berger from his unpaid, informal advisory role in John Kerry's campaign. Berger has always been a plodder, unimaginative but diligent. Only now has he become interesting, as his apparent mishandling of classified documents on terrorism from the National Archives has GOP leaders smelling blood. "What information could be so embarrassing that a man with decades of experience ? would risk being caught pilfering our nation's most sensitive secrets," demanded House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert. Majority Leader Tom DeLay warned that "it could be a national security crisis."

Slow down, guys. Berger, who admits he made an "honest mistake," is guilty of taking copies and handwritten notes (that too is a serious violation of the rules) but not original documents. He's returned most of them to the National Archives but says some are missing or discarded. His conduct is inexcusable. But traitorous? Before rushing to judgment, everyone should remember that the Justice Department is investigating and has yet to come to any firm conclusions. Maybe it never will.

Indeed, it's striking that Berger's accusers have yet to supply a motive for his actions. Do Hastert and DeLay believe that Berger would take that kind of risk to "assist" the Kerry campaign? Or to cover up a personal failure in confronting terrorism, because the documents were about the foiled so-called Millennium terrorist plot, which occurred during his watch? They don't say.

Anyway, the problem with such theories would be that because



the original documents remain in the National Archives,


Berger would not have been able to deny the 9/11 commission access to them. Any attempted cover-up would not have covered anything up. Instead, he's now drawn attention to the documents.

By contrast, the motives for whoever in the administration leaked the Berger investigation appear clear enough. Like the outing of former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV's wife, Valerie Plame, as a CIA agent, someone is sending up a smoke screen to deflect more serious charges. By creating a brouhaha about Berger's actions, the leaker distracts attention from any criticisms of President Bush and his administration in the independent 9/11 commission report.

The accusers' theories and winks hark to an earlier staple of far-right discourse, the frequent claims of treasonous conduct by President Clinton and his advisors, whether it was in dealing with terrorism or China.

Berger has only himself to blame. He should have known from experience that you don't get punished in Washington for policy mishaps like mistakenly bombing a medical factory in Sudan, but for personal missteps. His actions are so stupid that it would probably take a genius to explain them.

We aren't hearing from the geniuses yet.

 

[nbcrusader]

Berger has always been a plodder, unimaginative but diligent.

Nice premise to start. Does this suggest that Clinton made a bad choice for National Security Advisor?

Why does it always come back to the "RWC"?

 

[Dreadsox]

This "honest mistake" from someone who has been involved in our countries secrets, does not fly with me.

#1 It began before they caught him. Archivists were suspicious and caught him on a second (possibly third visit).
#2 I do not care where he put the documents to get them out, he knew better.
#3 When he found them at home, he should have returned them, not thrown them away.

 

[Klaus]

Dreadsox

 

[verte76]

I agree Dread this is not cool. He should have returned that stuff.

 

[verte76]

I also think Berger did some good things when he was National Security Advisor. He helped with the Good Friday treaty in Ireland. That's something IMO. I will agree that this is not exactly one of them.

 

[nbcrusader]

Perhaps Berger was trying to draw attention away from something else...

Berger Said No

On December 4, 1999, the National Security Council?s counterterrorism coordinator, Richard Clarke, sent Mr. Berger a memo suggesting a strike in the last week of 1999 against Al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan. Reports the commission: ?In the margin next to Clarke?s suggestion to attack Al Qaeda facilities in the week before January 1, 2000, Berger wrote, ?no.? ?

Somewhat inconsistent with his 9-11 Commission testimony (which focused on GWB).

 

[ThatGuy]

So he tried to hide his actions by destroying copies of the documents?

I also find it interesting that the editorial writer, when making the rhetorical statements about who is to blame for keeping Clinton preoccupied with other matters, does not mention the media.

 

[deep]

Anyway, the problem with such theories would be that because



the original documents remain in the National Archives,


Berger would not have been able to deny the 9/11 commission access to them. Any attempted cover-up would not have covered anything up. Instead, he's now drawn attention to the documents.

Everybody does realize "no evidence" was lost or destroyed?