Clinton Aide Faces Inquiry for Taking Classified Documents (NY Times Finally Reports)

The New York Times ^ | July 20, 2004 | Mark Glassman and David Stout

[Dems_R_Losers]

OK, fire away. This is headlined on the front of the NYT website now.

[LibFreeUSA]

-"President Clinton's national security advisor, Samuel R. Berger, inadvertently removed classified national security documents from the National Archives..."

I don't need to read beyond this.

[Indy Pendance]

That's as far as I got too.

[ItsTheMediaStupid]

Nothing about the fact that he was using the documents as underwear?

[bobo1]

"President Clinton's national security advisor, Samuel R. Berger, inadvertently (?) removed classified national security documents from the National Archives"

How do you "inadvertently" shove classified documents in your coat, your socks and your crotch (underwear)?

The NY Times writers are looneytoons.

Blessings, Bobo

[Tacis]

Willie's sewer dwellers are already at it! Lanny Davis just on CNN saying, "Reported the day of the Commission report. It sounds awfully suspicious to me." It is just like saying, "the bank had all that cash on the day that Willie walked in with a gun in his hand."

BERGER'S CRIME IS PROOF THAT WILLIE KNEW ABOUT AND COULD HAVE STOPPED 9-!! AND THAT THE COMMISSION REPORT IS A FAKE!!!

[Seeking the truth]

Rush said that this article appeared in the print version on page 19!

[Spok]

-"President Clinton's national security advisor, Samuel R. Berger, inadvertently removed classified national security documents from the National Archives..."

In his sock. No spin here.

[Senator_Blutarski]

Two questions:

(1) I thought I read somewhere that there were at least 5 instances where Berger pilphered documents. Is that true? If so, how can Berger claim this was unintentional?

(2) Do copies of the documents still exist? If so, when so we get to read them?

(Actually, I guess there's more than 2 questions there...)

[Dane]

-"President Clinton's national security advisor, Samuel R. Berger, inadvertently removed classified national security documents from the National Archives...

What? You don't inadvertenly stuff papers in your socks and pants. Weirdo.(New DNC talking points)

[NavySEAL F-16]

Let's see if it gets above the fold in tomorrow's print edition.

Then I'll believe that the NYT is serious.

[areafiftyone]

Rush is correct. On Fox and Friends this morning they showed the NY Times paper and were looking thru it to find where the article was located and it was a tiny little article on page 19.

[baseballmom]

Samuel R. Berger, inadvertently removed classified national security documents from the National Archives while vetting them in preparation for testimony before the Sept. 11 commission

How in the wide wide world of sports can someone INADVERNTENTLY remove classified documents by shoving them into your pants and jacket? I am absolutely insulted that they think we are that stupid that we will fall for that one. Arrrggghhhhhh !!!!!!!!!

[Mr Ramsbotham]

" ... When I was informed by the Archives there were documents missing, I immediately returned everything I had, except for a few documents that apparently I had accidentally discarded."

He obviously knew he had the documents before the Archives informed him that they were missing. Why didn't he return them the moment he supposedly found out that he had "accidentally" taken them? Why wait?

[bobo1]

(1) I thought I read somewhere that there were at least 5 instances where Berger pilphered documents. Is that true? If so, how can Berger claim this was unintentional?

Yes it is true. Berger is a liar, he will say anything.

(2) Do copies of the documents still exist? If so, when so we get to read them?

Ummmmmmmm.....I think that I read that some of the documents were "marked". Methinks that they still exist. Berger should be in prison as we speak.

Blessings, Bobo

[hershey]

Lies, lies, and more lies. Inadvertent, sloppy. Uh, I don't think so. Rush said Berglar's counterpart in the Bush admin. is Condi Rice. National Security Advisor. They don't act 'sloppily', they don't do things 'inadvertently'. No judge in his right mind would believe it. If Condi been caught doing what Berglar did, she'd already be in an orange jumpsuit in the cell next to Martha Stewart.

[ICX]

Let's see. They only talk to Berger's lawyers, make handy use of the word 'inadvertently,' and make it sound like no big deal, as he was simply 'reacquainting' himself with the documents. Well gee, NYT...why bother going after the guy at all?

[LibFreeUSA]

-"-...national security advisor, Samuel R. Berger, inadvertently removed classified national security documents..."

Imagine that! The NYT taking Sammy at his word without question!

[JennysCool]

The Left has just lost the "holier than thou" aura they think they acquired after getting rid of Nixon. This is bigtime stuff, and it's going to be hard for them to spin to an increasingly skeptical public. Methinks after reading this Times bilge that the spin doctors are losing their surgical skills.

Watch for the CYA to get even more hysterical as, one by one, their media allies desert them rather than take any more hits to their already seriously-wounded credibility.

If this isn't the beginning of the end of the Clinton Era, I think it is at least the end of the era in which this gang was taken seriously.

[IamConservative]

Anybody know where the scoop on the documents being smuggled out in his underwear and socks came from? How could this be known? I would think only Sandy Berger himself would know how he got them out.