Skip to comments.
Archive Employees Suspicious of Berger - They Were Watching Him
Drudge Report ^
| 7-21-04
| Drudge Report
Posted on 07/21/2004 7:59:22 PM PDT by Bronco_Buster_FweetHyagh
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340, 341-360, 361-380 ... 461-466 next last
To: Howlin
WOW!!!!!!!!!!! Solomon, at the crux of Both issues......
HE needs to be fired, or start doing some real reporting, instead fo acting like Lanny Davis' f*ng press agent.
(Wouldn't it be nice, if Comey wound up naming him in both cases.....)
341
posted on
07/22/2004 4:59:19 AM PDT
by
hobbes1
(Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
To: VRWCTexan
"What really blows my mind in all this the the "kerry" connection Since Bergers mouth piece made the statement that he went to the Archives on behalf of the Clinton Administration, it leaves no doubt in my mind that he was throwing up a smoke screen to divert attention. There is no Clinton Administration. He was working for Kerry.
342
posted on
07/22/2004 5:01:04 AM PDT
by
Flint
To: DUMBGRUNT; Howlin
To Clinton, and that might be a story. According to the reporter on FOX NEWS Special Report, the person he spoke to inside the campaign said, the reporters exact quote here --->) They were Highly pissed....
This looks like a Hillary!ous Torpedo into the side of the Kerry camp.
See the Washington Times about all the Clintonoids inside the campagin, and you have to know that they know exactly how this was leaked, now the campaign will be in disarray, behind the scenes, not knowing who to trust.....
343
posted on
07/22/2004 5:04:13 AM PDT
by
hobbes1
(Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
To: Flint
No. He was working for Clinton. Screwing Kerry.
344
posted on
07/22/2004 5:06:19 AM PDT
by
hobbes1
(Hobbes1TheOmniscient® "I know everything so you don't have to" ;)
To: Graymatter
"He told Tom Brokaw, "I had no clue." That is a typical Clintonspeak. No he didn't have "clues", he had all the facts and the documents, didn't need "clues".
345
posted on
07/22/2004 5:08:28 AM PDT
by
Flint
To: Bronco_Buster_FweetHyagh
There were several versions of the same memo--how were they different? Why would Berger want duplicate copies?
346
posted on
07/22/2004 5:10:34 AM PDT
by
Mamzelle
(for a post-neo conservatism)
To: Mamzelle
There were several versions of the same memo--how were they different? Why would Berger want duplicate copies?It's ALWAYS in the 'footnotes'....!!!
IMO
bttt
347
posted on
07/22/2004 5:20:04 AM PDT
by
maestro
To: Reactionary
"...the archivists first notified Bruce Lindsey of all people." This has to worry the Democrats. Why? Because, if the documents were specially marked and he was being surveilled by Archive staff, one gets the impression that other law enforcement agencies were involved. If that's the case, the call to Lindsey makes sense in the context of a sting operation. In other words, they called him to see who he would talk to and what he would say. That's got to worry the traitors on the Left.
Excellent points, and according to an article posted on this thread,Berger's mistake a kick in the pants
there was indeed a sting set up at the request of archive staff, once they realized what Bergler was up to.
348
posted on
07/22/2004 6:39:18 AM PDT
by
MamaLucci
(Libs, want answers on 911? Ask Clinton why he met with Monica more than with his CIA director.)
To: Principled
>>time to discuss the "millenium memo".
I'll bet you the juiciest documents stolen were about
something else completely, like letting Bin Laden get away.
(smokescreen alert)
To: Bronco_Buster_FweetHyagh
Bring in these guys to "question" Sandy --
To: Rhetorical pi2
I don't think we can depend on the Republican leaders in Congress to ask for a Special Prosecutor or a "Commission" to investigate any further.Agreed. My biggest fear is that Rove decides holding Berger to the rule of law is coming over to the Soccer Moms as too harsh.
351
posted on
07/22/2004 7:10:21 AM PDT
by
LTCJ
(Gridlock '05 - the Lesser of Three Evils.)
To: Southack
.And listen for the THUD sound of some opposition bigwigs getting taken down.Hopefully followed with the CLANG sound of a prison cell door shutting behind them!
352
posted on
07/22/2004 7:13:32 AM PDT
by
varon
(Allegiance to the constitution, always. Allegiance to a political party, never.)
To: devolve
353
posted on
07/22/2004 7:16:42 AM PDT
by
MeekOneGOP
(There is only one GOOD 'RAT: one that has been voted OUT of POWER !! Straight ticket GOP!)
To: POA2
Could you supply me with Aaron Brown's email?
I wrote him an email of complait once on his coverage of corporate scandals. He had interviewed Terry McAuliffe and never brought up Global Crossing.
Aaron Brown called him "that rascal" McAuliffe but said that his actions were not newsworthy.
I notice that this story isn't even on the CNN website.
354
posted on
07/22/2004 7:17:57 AM PDT
by
Republican Red
(Is that a classified document in your pants Sandy or are you just glad to see me?)
To: Republican Red
Anybody who has not worked with TOP SECRET and above documents needs to be made aware how there is NO WAY that Berger could "inadvertently" walk out with several copies of a 15-30 page document at least twice, and how there is NO WAY that he could "apparently" destroy some of those copies.
The best description I've seen so far is tang-soo's, and he posted it several times. If you haven't read it, please take the time to do so here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1176181/posts?page=78#78
355
posted on
07/22/2004 7:31:08 AM PDT
by
AFPhys
((.Praying for President Bush, our troops, their families, and all my American neighbors..))
To: AHerald; Rokke; CatoRenasci; ironman
Soliciting the opinion of those familiar with the handling of classified documents:
My interpretation of the stories of the "special markings" added by the Archives custodians after they became suspicious of Berger was they thought he might be altering hand-written (or other easily changeable) entries. In other words, since all classified documents are numbered and logged anyway, the only reason to "specifically mark" a classified document beyond its original state would be if you suspected it was being changed.
Can anyone think of anther plausible explanation in light of your experience?
356
posted on
07/22/2004 7:33:35 AM PDT
by
LTCJ
(Gridlock '05 - the Lesser of Three Evils.)
To: hiredhand; AFPhys
Meant to ping you on #356. Thoughts?
357
posted on
07/22/2004 7:37:31 AM PDT
by
LTCJ
(Gridlock '05 - the Lesser of Three Evils.)
To: hoosiermama
hmmmm that is an interestig take on this- Maybe Berger was trying to prevent his becoming another Arkancide
358
posted on
07/22/2004 7:40:48 AM PDT
by
Mr. K
(ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,this is like liberal logic,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø))
To: Southack
Your thoughts, please, on
#356.
359
posted on
07/22/2004 7:43:00 AM PDT
by
LTCJ
(Gridlock '05 - the Lesser of Three Evils.)
To: hiredhand
"In short, what I'm trying to say here is that for a person to gain access to the storage area where classified information is kept means that they've already agreed in writing on the prescribed methods and guidelines for the handling of such information. "Hugh Hewitt talked about the process and it was amazing. The warnings/agreement you speak of is apparently also affixed to many of the documents. Bergler did this because (1) he was incredibly arrogant or (2) incredibly scared. Time will tell...
360
posted on
07/22/2004 7:47:07 AM PDT
by
eureka!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340, 341-360, 361-380 ... 461-466 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