We now know Bill Clinton probably knew about this before George Bush did.
A more important question, of course, is: What was contained in the papers that Berger snatched? The answers to that question might answer another. Maybe Clinton's top national security aide didn't want others to see what they documented.
I may be wrong, but I don't think this is going to just "get spun away" like the other Clinton scandals have.
Let the chant begin: "TREASON, TREASON, TREASON!!"
It will be spun away unless the US Attorney for the Southern District of New York indicts Berger. He might. This is apparently the guy who nailed Martha Stewart. If he indicts, then the media will have a VERY hard time ignoring it.
Not so long as we don't forget it. We need to "bookmark" it in our minds for keeping tabs on and to every now and then give the Pols a little nudge - as in a sharp jab to the solar plexus.
If this sounds preposterous, consider this:
Since Berger claims to have "lost" some of these documents, I could easily sit down and spend a couple of hours making fake "copies" of a series of documents -- and they would contain a whole sh!t-load of unflattering information about Berger, Clinton, Gorelick, etc. in the execution of their duties in the late 1990s.'
Watch how quickly Berger would then "find" the documents he allegedly lost.
There's one sure way to avoid it being "spun" away. Indict Berger on multiple counts of felonious theft of classified documents which will carry a huge jail sentence with it. Then simply ask him how valuable he thinks protecting Clinton's already sordid legacy is.
In his book, Davis wrote: "When bad news is coming, get your version, an alternative story line, out first." Davis gives an example of some damning information about Clinton that they leaked to the Associated Press – which, by the way, was first to get the Berger leak. I'm not saying there was any connection or attaching any name to this.
I'm not so sure. The Lib media is going out of it's way to paint him as a "befuddled-absentminded professor type. The thing of it is, he took the same exact pages twice! He removed all copies of the same documents. Some were marked with ink after the first theft. Those are the same that went missing the second time around. Of course, the Lib media broke the story on page 16 of the NYTimes, page 13 of the Chicago Tribune and I think it was page 12 in the LA Times. They're burying it and not letting out the details. The sheeple think it's no big deal.
Get it out this week & hope the dem convention coverage buries it....
"What papers were important enough for Sandy Berger to risk his reputation and career and fall on his sword for this way?"
He was willing to risk it because he's an arrogant SOB and he knew that if he got caught his liberal cohorts and the MSM would make excuses for him.
The bad news/attack with more bad news, MO of the Left; is simply a more personalized but time-honored war tactic; ' the best defense is a good offense'. . .
As to whether Sandy gets away with this; for some reason, perhaps the demrats history; this calls to mind the old question: if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there; will it make a sound?
and...
The Bush Administration should take the better suggestions of the 9.11 Commission, improve upon them and put bills in the Congress before it adjourns for the election season.
Definitely. It means Berger isn't loyal to Kerry, but to Clinton---who also isn't loyal to Kerry. Poor JFK, everybody knew and nobody would tell him...
A 2nd Bush admin. should devote much resources to bringing the entire klinton crimminal operatio to justice and reveal everything.
I found the timing of this whole Bergler story very suspicious. It came out one day before the 9-11 report. Brilliant move! Berger is the lead story for one whole day, then comes the long-awaited 9-11 report and whoosh! Berger is no longer front page news. Only the Democrats would have anything to gain by this "suspicious timing" that they touted on every news channel.
If the Republicans leaked this they would have done it friday. Closer to the DNC convention and would play better on the sunday shows. So the dems leaked it early hoping it would die out. The NEW MEDIA will not let it.
I hadn't thought about this but I think Rush is on to something. Of course we know, that whatever the Dems accuse the Republicans of doing, they are actually the guilty ones.
bttt