Posted on 07/21/2004 6:09:46 AM PDT by Nasty McPhilthy
In Washington this morning, government officials are trying to piece together the facts of the Sandy Berger case in an attempt to understand what the former Clinton administration national-security adviser was trying to accomplish when he allegedly took highly classified documents from the National Archives.
Berger, who yesterday quit his position as an informal adviser to the Kerry campaign, was appointed by former President Clinton to vet Clinton-administration documents before those documents were turned over to the September 11 investigating commission. Berger claims that as he went through a large number of documents last fall, he inadvertently put a few in his briefcase and took them home. "In the course of reviewing over several days thousands of pages of documents on behalf of the Clinton administration in connection with requests by the September 11 commission, I inadvertently took a few documents from the Archives," Berger said in a written statement. "When I was informed by the Archives that there were documents missing, I immediately returned everything I had except for a few documents that I apparently had accidentally discarded."
But it appears that some of the evidence in the case casts doubt on Berger's explanation. First, Berger has reportedly conceded that he knowingly hid his handwritten notes in his jacket and pants in order to sneak them out of the Archives. Any notes made from classified material have to be cleared before they can be removed from the Archives — a common method of safeguarding classified information — and Berger's admission that he hid the notes in his clothing is a clear sign of intent to conceal his actions.
Second, although Berger said he reviewed thousands of pages, he apparently homed in on a single document: the so-called "after-action report" on the Clinton administration's handling of the millennium plot of 1999/2000. Berger is said to have taken multiple copies of the same paper. He is also said to have taken those copies on at least two different days. There have been no reports that he took any other documents, which suggests that his choice of papers was quite specific, and not the result of simple carelessness.
Third, it appears that Berger's "inadvertent" actions clearly aroused the suspicion of the professional staff at the Archives. Staff members there are said to have seen Berger concealing the papers; they became so concerned that they set up what was in effect a small sting operation to catch him. And sure enough, Berger took some more. Those witnesses went to their superiors, who ultimately went to the Justice Department. (There was no surveillance camera in the room in which Berger worked with the documents, meaning there is no videotape record of the incidents.)
The documents Berger took — each copy of the millennium report is said to be in the range of 15 to 30 pages — were highly secret. They were classified at what is known as the "code word" level, which is the government's highest tier of secrecy. Any person who is authorized to remove such documents from a special secure room is required to do so in a locked case that is handcuffed to his or her wrist.
It is not clear why Berger would focus solely on the millennium-plot report. But it is clear that the report has been the object of intense discussions during the September 11 investigation.
The report was the result of a review done by Richard Clarke, then the White House counterterrorism chief, of efforts by the Clinton administration to stop terrorist plots at the turn of the year 2000. At several points in the September 11 commission hearings, Democrats pointed to the millennium case as an example of how a proper counterterrorism program should be run. But sources say the report suggests just the opposite. Clarke apparently concluded that the millennium plot was foiled by luck — a border agent in Washington State who happened to notice a nervous, sweating man who turned out to have explosives in his car — and not by the Clinton administration's savvy anti-terrorism work. The report also contains a number of recommendations to lessen the nation's vulnerability to terrorism, but few were actually implemented.
The after-action review became the topic of public discussion in April when Attorney General John Ashcroft mentioned it in his public testimony before the September 11 commission. "This millennium after-action review declares that the United States barely missed major terrorist attacks in 1999 and cites luck as playing a major role," Ashcroft testified. "It is clear from the review that actions taken in the millennium period should not be the operating model for the U.S. government."
In May, a government official told National Review Online that the report contains a "scathing indictment of the last administration's actions." The source said the report portrayed the Clinton administration's actions as "exactly how things shouldn't be run." In addition, Clarke was highly critical of the handling of the millennium plot in his book, Against All Enemies.
It is not clear how many copies of the report exist. Nor is it clear why Berger was so focused on the document. If he simply wanted a copy, it seems that taking just one would have been sufficient. But it also seems that Berger should have known that he could not round up all the known copies of the document, since there were apparently other copies in other secure places. Whatever the case, the report was ultimately given to the September 11 Commission.
Berger is either stupid/incompetent or had criminal intent. Either way....
Just your average Democrat
Beside somehow it has to be Bush fault
"Berger is either stupid/incompetent or had criminal intent. Either way...."
Either way, he was a top adviser to Kerry.
Take the keys and lock him up
And anyone who thinks he has "quit" advising the Kerry campaign is gullible enough to believe Berger just made "an honest mistake."
How about "all of the above?"
He claims incompetence. Justice may say different....
Yeah, but what if it wasn't the document, it was hand-written notations on the document? That's why they make multiple copies, isn't it?
Tom Brokejaw had this as lead story last night on NBC. Clinton, at a book signing in Denver, looking especially fleshy, said the Burglar had "worked his tail off" for the American people...
I spent last night and this morning laughing at Democrats trying to spin the unspinable.....(grin)
And for some reason, this story causes me to consider another dumb Democrat, Bob Beckel - the guy that though bribing delegates of the Electoral College was a "good idea".
If you are a Bush supporter you simply can't script these kinds of stories that clearly portray the Democrats as imbeciles.
Does anyone seriously think that if Condi Rice had done something like this, the media and the Dems would believe her? Obviously Condi would never do something as transparently stupid as what Bergler did, but the point remains the same: Republicans would never be able to get away with just some glib explanation about an "honest mistake". I mean for crying out loud he was stuffing top-secret documents down his pants!! Would a Republican get the benefit of the doubt ? Of course not. They'd be hollering COVERUP!!!! and demanding their scalp.
Ignorance of the law is not an excuse us common folks can use and intent is not a defense..
"Yes sir, I did put briefs in my boxers on several occasions. I can assure you it was to cure a Taco Bell hangover and not the content of the documents."
Letters to the Editor...all across The Country...
"The local press in every community is much more independent..."
Karen Hughes
How many other deceitful Klintoon holdovers does kerry have in his campaign? Inquiring minds want to know. A Kerry/Edwards presidency is beginning to smell more and more like a rehash of the Klintoon years. The Republic can not afford any more "Trouser-Gates"!!!!!!
peace....D
Not if the memos were of different revisions. I'm betting each time a draft was circulated through the upper echelons of the Clinton Administration, that it came back with 'comments' requesting that certain things be edited or 'softened.' Comparing one draft to the subsequent draft would give an indication of the REAL truth and how political pressure may have been used to obscure it.
....and I'm betting that the earlier drafts may not have been copied, possibly only the final one exists in duplicate. Therefore scarfing up the original drafts would go a long way toward preserving the Clinton testimony to the 9/11 commission.
rules are for little people... and republicans since the media will provide cover for RAT lawbreaking and disrespect of our institutions
If so then Berger's goose is cooked.
There may be as many as a few hundred thousand people who have to live by the very strict rules we have established for the handling of classified material and a fraction of these will be trusted with "code word" classified documents.
There is no way that we could maintain any credibility in this system if Berger was somehow to escape punishment for a violation of the rules this severe. The morale of the security officers in the Government and in the U.S. aerospace industry who are responsible for briefing cleared personnel and maintaining classified document control systems would simply be destroyed.
That's not going to happen on Bush's watch. OTOH, you can be sure that Kerry would pardon him in heartbeat.
...BTW, we know that the Gore Commission softened it's recommendations for airport security when the major airlines b*tched. What do you want to bet that the various drafts of the same memo are a graphic demonstration of the Clinton Administration shifting from an aggressive anti-terror proposal to something more ineffective.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.