Posted on 07/21/2004 1:15:11 PM PDT by The_Victor
To me, this smacks of Hillary and the FBI files. Everyone is focused on the likelihood that Berger stole documents that make the Clinton adminstration look bad. That is probably true. But a second, and no less important motive, might have been to dig RADIOACTIVE DIRT on other Washington insiders who dropped the ball on terrorism.
If you think the FBI files allowed Hillary and co. to extort people, just imagine what this kind of information would allow them to do.
They are sooooo off!. The Clintons did it, of course.
vaudine
"I'm not aware of how this story came about. I know of no one in the White House that is aware of how this story came about," McClellan said.
He said officials in the White House legal counsel's office were made aware of the Berger investigation some time ago because they were in charge of putting together documents for the Sept. 11 commission to see.
As Howlin pointed out on another thread where I posted McClellan's "counsel's office" comment, this would have been back during February when Bruce Lindsey up and complained loud and strong that the Bush administration was not releasing a bunch of Clinton era documents to the 9/11 commission. This turned out to be false--but the documents that had already been turned over were gone over again. We all thought it odd and knew Lindsey had some ulterior motive that we couldn't quite put our fingers on. Now we have a better idea.
Back to the Kerry statement, it's their usual rude and abrasive and sophomoric rhetoric that we've all come to know so well. Obnoxious and arrogant and perhaps just a wee bit panicked.
They are always calling the 'kettle black', best way to cover up their dirty tricks.
I hope you're right. I really do.
But I get a little discouraged when I realize that there've been 45 posts on some stupid Bonnie Rait thread in the last 10 minutes and even more than that on some troll-baiting vanity thread that went live 6 minutes ago.
If we're going to get Berger's head on a pike (and I'll make no bones about it, that's what I want), we will need to stay focused. The dems will throw a hell of a lot of tempting distractions at us.
Actually:
SENATE REPUBLICANS ACCUSE JOHN KERRY OF USING CLASSIFIED INFO STOLEN BY SANDY BERGER
There've now been over 100 on the vanity thread. At this rate, it will surpass this one in about 12 minutes.
Unbelievable.
"They must have a real pathetic case against Berger, if they are still investigating after nine months---and a confession---and no charges yet.
That's because it always works.
Will this instance of "calling the 'kettle black'" be any different?
Time to take the RNC to bootcamp, Sarge!! Errr, sir. Need a whoopin' dose of patriot training.
I saw part of the President of Romania earlier, who I thought was just terrific.
And Fox just replayed the portion you cited where President Bush was asked about Berger and answered as you describe.
Making predictions about this sort of thing is kind of futile. Let's just see what happens in the coming weeks and months.
It is not an easy thing to arraign a former National Security Advisor, particularly in an eleciton year, and particularly when he is in the opposite party.
A long time ago, I read about reporters who primarily hang around courthouses and places like that just waiting for info like this to come up (they were digging up dirt on celebrities).
How likely is it that a search warrant served on the former NSA would go unnoticed by the press?
Hello?
I've read "Hillary was behind this" on virtually every thread.
What are you talking about, saying nobody else has said it.
Oh--and it's wrong--at least as far as advancing herself. If she's behind the "leak" at all, along with her lawful spouse, it's to protect her own hide (as the Kerry camp likes to say), as she's as implicated in the security breach as Berger and Bill.
1.We didn't do it.
2.We didn't mean to do it.
3.Everyone does it.
4.The prosecutors are on a witch hunt.
And number five added by Steve_Seattle.
5. We need to find out who in the Bush administration leaked this information; this is an ongoing investigation, and leaking privileged information is a felony.
Reports are there is no video.
I think I read the FBI got involved (or as Lanny Breuer, Berger's attorney says "3 months later decided to get involved", as if inserting themselves inappropriately) in January. That's why we're hearing the phrase "3 months later" referring to October until January.
Oh--and the Republicans were concerned about a press briefing Berger gave *on Kerry's behalf* on February 27, to help your timeline.
I don't want our side to lie, so they're not about to claim they leaked it when they didn't.
I get your idea, but I think some of you aren't aware of some of the tough talk our side took out of the gate. Take heart.
It is not an easy thing to arraign a former National Security Advisor, particularly in an eleciton year, and particularly when he is in the opposite party.
No, exactly. But instead of whining about incompetence in the WH, look at what has happened so far:
1) Berger has tried to cut a deal with the DOJ but been rejected - so maybe he'll have to come up with something (or someone) better. 2) Berger has had to resign from the Kerry campaign. 3) The Kerry campaign is now so unsure of what the DOJ know that they've had to take down old Kerry speeches from their web-site - and this just when Kerry is preparing his big acceptance speech. 4) And of course the DNC has asked for all correspondence (between the WH and DOJ) to be released - a double edged sword, if there's ever been one. It will be very interesting to see how Ashcroft will handle this. But note that much of what Ashcroft said during his interview with the 9/11 Committee can be understood in the light of "Trousergate".
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.