Skip to comments.
Federal probe targets Clinton's national security adviser
CNN.com ^
| July 20, 2004
| John King
Posted on 07/20/2004 10:47:03 AM PDT by cyncooper
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-107 next last
I have seen this article posted as a reply on a few threads, but not on its own. I apologize if this is a duplicate of the article reporting the Richard Clarke link.
1
posted on
07/20/2004 10:47:06 AM PDT
by
cyncooper
To: EllaMinnow
2
posted on
07/20/2004 10:47:33 AM PDT
by
cyncooper
("We will fear no evil...And we will prevail")
To: cyncooper; My2Cents; Wolfstar; Mo1; Howlin
Good post, cyn.
The Clarke link cannot be overlooked.
3
posted on
07/20/2004 10:50:55 AM PDT
by
onyx
(Kerry/Edwards: It's the hair, stupid.)
To: cyncooper
But the sources close to Berger said there were other copies of the drafts, that the commission had the final version of the report and that Clarke had said there were not significant changes during the drafting process. I want to see what Clarke actually said. And what he thinks now, now his prior words are becoming an excuse.
"not significant changes" - If they weren't significant, Berger wouldn't have taken them.
4
posted on
07/20/2004 10:51:16 AM PDT
by
Shermy
To: cyncooper
According to Berger, he "accidentally" stuffed the papers in his pants - and he didn't mean "pockets."
That ever happen to you? You accidentally stuff documents in your pants that you meant to put back where they belong?
Didn't think so.
5
posted on
07/20/2004 10:51:36 AM PDT
by
Redbob
To: Howlin; Mo1
They said the drafts were written by Clinton counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke and had been changed somewhat, as is customary, as the drafts were circulated among relevant agencies and officials. CNN reports that Berger took documents authored by Richard Clarke.
6
posted on
07/20/2004 10:52:15 AM PDT
by
cyncooper
("We will fear no evil...And we will prevail")
To: Shermy
If they weren't significant, Berger wouldn't have taken them.Indeed...
7
posted on
07/20/2004 10:53:29 AM PDT
by
cyncooper
("We will fear no evil...And we will prevail")
To: cyncooper
DOES THIS ACT BY BERGER MEAN THAT
CLINTON KNEW ABOUT AL QUAIDA..........
8
posted on
07/20/2004 10:55:13 AM PDT
by
ncfool
To: cyncooper
DOES THIS ACT BY BERGER MEAN THAT
CLINTON KNEW ABOUT AL QUAIDA'S PLAN TO USE PLANES ..............
9
posted on
07/20/2004 10:56:41 AM PDT
by
ncfool
To: Dog
From the article:
Berger has stressed his willingness to cooperate, but investigators have not asked to speak directly with him as yet, the sources said.
Asked if it unusual that Berger has not yet been interviewed, the government official familiar with the investigation responded that investigators would do so once they are satisfied they have the evidence they need.
Hmmmmmmmmm
10
posted on
07/20/2004 10:57:06 AM PDT
by
cyncooper
("We will fear no evil...And we will prevail")
To: cyncooper
They said the drafts were written by Clinton counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke and had been changed somewhat, as is customary, as the drafts were circulated among relevant agencies and officials. Altering documents huh?
DANG .. is FR slow or is it just me?
11
posted on
07/20/2004 10:57:14 AM PDT
by
Mo1
(50 States .... I want all 50 States come November!)
To: cyncooper
.......footnotes,....it's ALWAYS in the footnotes!
Los Clintonos Lab notes....
/sarcasm
12
posted on
07/20/2004 10:57:35 AM PDT
by
maestro
To: cyncooper
Officials close to Berger said it was ludicrous to suggest that he was trying to hide damaging information from the 9/11 commission. Good Gawd!!
OK, so he just has a fetish for paper?
Also, it isn't ludicrous to claim the timing of this scandal to be suspicious?
13
posted on
07/20/2004 10:57:53 AM PDT
by
EGPWS
To: EGPWS
OK, so he just has a fetish for paper?Knowing this crew I honestly wouldn't be surprised to hear one of his "associates" present this as an explanation. I'm serious.
14
posted on
07/20/2004 10:59:37 AM PDT
by
cyncooper
("We will fear no evil...And we will prevail")
To: Shermy
And I guess we're just supposed to take Clarke's word for it?
I don't think so.
To: Mo1
just draft documents with comments and edits as they go through the system to become final. Nothing sinister here.
16
posted on
07/20/2004 11:01:23 AM PDT
by
gilliam
To: Redbob
That ever happen to you? You accidentally stuff documents in your pants that you meant to put back where they belong? I expect they just fell down his pants and he didn't notice them till he got undressed later in the whorehouse where he went to meet bill, it can happen you know.
Nothing to see here...move on..
17
posted on
07/20/2004 11:01:24 AM PDT
by
Wil H
To: EGPWS
Sorta like the nice soft feel of womens lingerie on the male body. I guess them paper cuts would be nasty down the shorts.
OK, so he just has a fetish for paper?
Also, it isn't ludicrous to claim the timing of this scandal to be suspicious?
18
posted on
07/20/2004 11:01:38 AM PDT
by
ncfool
To: nuffsenuff
Sandy Berger is covering his ass.
How can 911 comission make a report when they didn't have all the documents.
But of course, it's just like WACO, they get rid of all the things damaging to them.
Sandy Berger believes, just like Mr. Perry, that our soventy should be turned over to the United Nations.
19
posted on
07/20/2004 11:01:38 AM PDT
by
take
To: cyncooper
Knowing this crew I honestly wouldn't be surprised to hear one of his "associates" present this as an explanation.After all that has transpired since '93 in national politics, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that it's true!
20
posted on
07/20/2004 11:03:16 AM PDT
by
EGPWS
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 101-107 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson