Posted on 07/21/2004 7:59:22 PM PDT by Bronco_Buster_FweetHyagh
Archives Employees Suspicious of Berger... devised a coding system and marked the documents they knew Berger was interested in canvassing, and watched him carefully... employees determined that that draft and all four or five other versions of the millennium memo had disappeared from the files after Berger viewed them, WASH POST set to report, say sources... Developing...
After a person leaves the govt. do they STILL have security clearance for LIFE???
People lost their HEADS because that scandal came out!!
I have not had time to read the thread today yet, but Bergler by nature of his job had to know they were copies, and the originals would remain. So why do it? I will update myself on this thread about 10 PM to see what is known at this time. I still dont get it.
HOW would the Archives staff KNOW to call little Bruce Lindsey?? WHY would Bruce Lindsey even come to mind???
Sooooo, just the Archive staff was looking into this from October...maybe Sept..and didn't call in the FBI until JANUARY????? Someone is DIRTY on the Archive staff....imho.
BINGO. Yes, there were handwritten notes on the drafts. There is nothing more incriminating than that! (Probably each member of the 'team' got a copy and made notes on it while they were reviewing it waaaay back in 2000.) That's why Berger went back again and again to get them all. Check out Opinion Journal's Best of Web today.
I am not all that sure Berger was working for The USA at all times.
Hang on---the FBI isn't the only entity that could conceivably be looking into it. Rather, I would think (this is a guess since no reporting has stated who, if anyone was officially on the case until January) they called the police---then the FBI came in.
We'll have to wait. The fact that they are giving such detail tells me they are on the right side of the law.
Lindsey was the liason for Clinton records.
Because Bruce Lindsey is Clinton's liaison with the archives. The "go between". He'd be the one they were supposed to call for anything to do with Clinton administration documents.
They called him the first time (according to government sources and denied by the Berger camp, I believe--going by memory). The second time they called Berger directly and sent someone to his home to pick up the documents.
Richard Clarke is out there today criticizing the commission for not coming down hard on the Bush administration. How I hope he's involved in this up to his waxy ears and gets nabbed with the rest of these creeps.
It's ALWAYS in the 'footnotes'..........
/sarcasm
pass the popcorn...
It's ALWAYS in the 'footnotes'.....
Good point.
Now.....I get it.
I still find it astonishing that Berger would engage in such an easily detectable and high-risk maneuver. To protect Clinton? He would risk humility, financial ruin, and imprisonment for BJ? Why? And Why now?
It is difficult to imagine that anything in those documents could be damaging to him personally, and after reviewing them, he could have at least avoided perjuring himself at the 9-11 hearings. But it is very easy to imagine the archives might contain information that the Clinton's thought OK to leave behind, but which could have been very damaging given 9-11.
So, why would Berger risk so much? Loyalty? Naaah. Arrogance? Perhaps. Fear of what might be in his FBI file? Hmmmm.....
Thanks for the ping!
Yes, but does that mean there weren't copies made when these drafts were archived?
The Wash. Post must have finally realized Clinton's no longer president and nobody believes Berger...too many witnesses. Must have been a hard pill for The Wash. Post to swallow.
I continue to ask the same question. I have never understood why so many of Clinton's advisors and cabinet members stuck by him except to conclude that they were enslaved by their own agenda (be it the self esteem quest of Albright and Reno or the political aspirations of Gore and Hillary). Why would Berger stay with a man who showed such a lack of seriousness on national security issues? Anyway, I don't believe Berger would pull this stunt to save or protect Clinton alone, there was something in it for him. And I don't think that was a position with Kerry, his experience/network would have provided him with ample information to feed the Kerry campaign.
I can think of only two things that would compel a 50-something man to do this. Either he felt or was told that he was covered by insiders while he was swiping the documents or he risked jail and/or the loss of all that he made of himself if he didn't swipe them.
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.