The Gauntlet Berger Ran at the National Archive Vault

GoGov.com ^ | July 22, 2004 | Russell Betts

[BJungNan]

In this environment, former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger would be watched closely, as we now learn that he was.

Archive staff approached Berger on his first return trip to the Archive and confronted him about missing documents. Berger returned those documents. But when he did Archive staff found documents they had not realized he had taken. The staff then started marking any documents they provided to him for his review in the vault. Berger had to know the Archive staff was aware of his actions, yet he kept illegally removing documents.

Berger and his lawyer explain his actions as sloppy. Former President Bill Clinton said he and some friends had a good laugh about it when they heard the news. There was nothing sloppy about it unless you consider it sloppy that he got caught. And the stealing of highly sensitive documents, no matter what the reason turns out to be, is no laughing matter.

"What information could be so embarrassing that a man with decades of experience in handling classified documents would risk being caught pilfering our nation's most sensitive secrets?" House Speaker Dennis Hastert said. "Mr. Berger has a lot of explaining to do."

Indeed he does.

[BJungNan]

Another story at the same link say Kerry is accused of using Berger documents to formulate his campaign positions.

[Spok]

If Kerry was a Republican, this would be the end of his candidacy.

[Cicero]

It gives Hillary a nice handle if she chooses to depose Kerry. Instead of pulling out the FBI files or fiddling with his plane, she can just ask her friends in the media to turn on the heat.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

Didn't the Rosenbergs get the chair for stealing classified docs?

He definitely shared them with the enemy of the Republic.

These are highest level classified.

[BJungNan]

If Kerry was a Republican, this would be the end of his candidacy.

This story has legs. It may not come to an end of the Kerry candidacy but he certainly is linked to it. If you ask me, this has all the makings of a "two bit burglary" aka the Watergate break in.

There is far more to this story than has as yet been reported. It is big enough that journalists, no matter their political leanings, will see blood in it.

Also don't discount the effect FR and other uncontrolled news outlets will play in this story. Already FR is credited in several places with preserving evidence in this story - Kerry campaign immediately pulled Kerry's foreign policy position papers from its web site. But FR has for all the world to see what Kerry is trying to hide.

[Flash Bazbeaux]

"If Kerry was a Republican, this would be the end of his candidacy."


Well, clearly the only honorable response to Berger's pilfering is for Bush to demand Rumsfeld's resignation.

[Diogenesis]

Maybe Berger's clients, the Communist Chinese and al Qaeda Democrats
needed the sensitive locations at harbors, trainlines, etc. for their bombs.

Maybe Berger's client, Sen. Kerry,
needed the sensitive locations at harbors, trainlines, etc. for his speeches.

---

"I was summoned to the office of National Security adviser Sandy Berger,
who chewed me out for not having a national security adviser.
So I opened the next season with Anna Deavere Smith as the national security adviser" -
Aaron Sorkin

[TexasCajun]

Another story at the same link say Kerry is accused of using Berger documents to formulate his campaign positions.

This thing isn't about Kerry, it's about the Impeached President's testimony before the 911 commission.

[M. Peach]

Can you imagine the outrage from the democrats if someone like Powell or Rumsfeld (Who is in charge of the NSA now?) had done this.

Would Clinton be laughing? Would the newspapers say it was just "sloppy?"

[JustaCowgirl]

You know, it occurs to me that Terry McAuliffe is in a difficult position. If Berger, Clinton, and the attorney buddy have known about this for months, did McAuliffe know? If he didn't, then those people did not confide something of this magnitude to the chairman of the DNC, and continued to let Berger in the inner realms of the party.

If McAuliffe has known, then we are expected to believe that he didn't tell Kerry about it, and let Kerry bring Berger on as chief foreign policy advisor.

Would be nice if somebody would ask McAuliffe when he knew about this. But they'll only allow tame journalists close to them, I imagine.

[BJungNan]

This thing isn't about Kerry, it's about the Impeached President's testimony before the 911 commission.

Maybe originally. But there is definately now a more serious link also being made to Kerry. Why did Kerry pull this material from his website? That needs an explanation.

[TheCrusader]

"It is big enough that journalists, no matter their political leanings, will see blood in it."

If the 'journalists' out there see blood in this story they won't be breaking the news. They'll be breaking out the bandaids.

[TexasCajun]

Mr Kerry, "What did you Know and When did you Know it?"

Let's see Bergler's phone records?

My other question is why is the American Taxpayer just now finding out about the 6+ month investigation?

[Southack]

I'd like to know if the cell phone that Berger was allowed in with...was a camera phone.

6 Full Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires

[gathersnomoss]

The Republicans seem to be letting this slip through their willing arms. Ah, screw the nation, we have a job to do.

Both party's flaunt the law. The dems break it, the pubs ignore the perps. One can only pray that God can see a better future. Pubs give the future lip service and ignore the obvious for their own purpose.

My vote is wasted when the republicans continue to not give a s*#t. This country could be the shining light on the hill. I miss Reagan.

[CyberAnt]

"she can just ask her friends in the media to turn on the heat"

I get the feeling that is already happening.

[tang-soo]

I've posted this top a few other threads. Please ignore if you've seen it before ...

I called our local Clear Channel station the night after this story broke and spoke for about 10 minutes describing the procedures used to handle classified information. The following is a basic description of what I said ...

1) A person who wishes to review classified information at a given facility must have his/her clearance on file with the security office that has legal custody of the information.

2) Once they arrive to the facility, they must show their credentials to identify themselves, sign into the facility - maybe issued a badge indicating their clearance and access and escorted to the room where the material will be reviewed.

3) A quick sidebar on program access and document marking. The term "Access" refers to the concept of "Need to Know". The fact you have a clearance that matches the level required to have access to the material does not establish your "need to know". It must be determined by someone like a program manager or security personnel that your job function requires access to certain information. If you are granted access, you may be required to go through another level of investigation. Some levels of access (at least the ones I was exposed to) are known as "Special Need to Know" or SNTK (pronounced Snick) and "Special Access Required" or SAR. Programs with these designations require special prominent markings on each page of a classified document along with the classification level. Believe it or not, after all the markings (top and bottom) there usually is enough room for the content of the page.

4) I should also mention that each paragraph of the document starts with a designation indicating the classification level of that paragraph. This would look like (U), (C), (S), (S/SAR), (S/SNTK), (TS) or (TS/SAR). Every page is marked top and bottom based upon the highest level of any paragraph on that page. ie. it's possible to have an unclassified page in a top secret document. And as you might think, the overall classification of the document is classified at the highest level of any single page.

5) This next point is especially important in light of the current investigation. Every page is marked "Page x of y Pages". For example page 13 of a 32 page document would be clearly marked in the banner section of the page "Page 13 of 32 Pages". This is done for obvious reasons - if any page is missing, it can be accounted for. The page count is also part of the document's registration in the security catalog.

6) Once in the room, the container (probably a safe i.e. a very heavy duty file cabinet with heavy combination locks with different combinations on each drawer) is opened. This process should be logged by security personnel.

7) The documents are taken from the container. All classified documents are stamped (each page) with items such as a control number, date of creation, level of clearance (top and bottom), program name indicating what access is required and eventual dispensation (i.e. when the material is designated to destruction if applicable).

8) If the documents are classified "top secret", each document has a log on the cover sheet. EACH time a person has access to this information, they must sign and date it.

9) The material is not to be removed (ie stuffed in underwear, socks ... etc) without approval of security personnel. If this takes place, the transfer is documented on both ends of the transaction. If the material is top secret or above, it requires at least two cleared people as an escort.

10) If you travel overnight, the material is not to be kept in your hotel/motel room but instead must be taken to an approved facility. Arrangements are usually made in advance. Security people do not like suprise visits. They like to make them but not receive them.

11) No photocopies are to be made or notes copied without the proper security personnel logging this activity and making appropriate markings (mentioned above) on the documents.

12) This material is frequently audited by internal security agents and is subject to "suprise" audits conducted by military, FBI or other external security personnel.

13) People given access to this type of information are briefed and attend classes on how to handle this material - ie. no excuses for "honest mistakes".

14) As the NSA for the Clinton administration, I imagine Berger was personally responsible that this protocol was designed, implemented and enforced by his staff - at least in an appropriately managed administration. This would apply to government employees, officials, military personnel and civilians under contract and extended clearances issued by the DoD, DoE or other intel operations.

15) As such, ANYBODY who has worked in this environment and heard Mr. Berger's comments yesterday about being "sloppy" and "an honest mistake" knows beyond any doubt that he was not only lying, but this was a premeditated act.

16) I left the aerospace business(as an engineer) in 1993 so these comments are based upon the security world of that time. Only Lord knows how the Clinton administration changed things during his 8 years.

That summarizes what I mentioned to Steve Cannon of WTVN 610 AM (Columbus, Oh) the night after the story broke.

I should have added another issue that may pertain to the current case. The concept of "Working papers". This would be scratch material that is never intended to end up in a document being prepared. For example, preliminary drafts, graphics with various scales, handdrawn sketches, ... etc. Usually, this kind of material is kept in a folder or envelope which is marked as a regular document would be. This folder falls under the same criteria as a regular document ie locking up when not being used ... etc. Usually, this material is collected on a regular basis when the work is finished and tossed into a "burn barrel". The burn barrel is emptied periodically by cleared personnel and either burned or processed through an approved shredder (ends up as dust).

The latest word I have heard is that this material was classified "Code Word Access". Folks, if true, this is "Above Top Secret" ie. John Pollard type material.

So the question comes to mind, why would anybody do such a thing under conditions where he knew he stood a huge chance of being caught? The mission must have been extraordinary for such a risk. The presumption is that he wanted to alter or remove and destroy material that implicated either himself, or quite possibly Mr. Clinton. The fact that some of the material is "lost" implies that regardless of the consequences, the mission has been accomplished with his current situation collateral damage.

Webb Hubbell's infamous quote "I guess I'll have to roll over again for Hillary" comes to mind. Another example of the Clinton whirlwind leaving a trail of destruction in its wake.

[gathersnomoss]

"Would be nice if somebody would ask McAuliffe when he knew about this. But they'll only allow tame journalists close to them, I imagine."

In a perfect world, everyone involved with this theft of secure information would be subpoenaed and hauled into court YESTERDAY. However, considering that this story is moving at a snails pace while the typical deals are being made, I believe Berger will walk and this will be much ado about nothing.

[Guenevere]

#5..fwiw....Watergate was called a ...."3rd rate burglary"

Tom Delay just yesterday colored 'trousergate' with the same 'catch-phrase'.

[rod1]

Someone should ask Clinton (the next time he shows up in public) if he is in the habit of laughing about crimimal breaches in our national security. That outrageous comment alone should establish his true LEGACY.