Posted on 07/23/2004 7:49:37 PM PDT by quidnunc
"The innocent explanation is the most likely one, particularly given the facts involved," Bill Clinton said in defense of former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger. Who, you've probably heard, is in some hot water for getting caught illicitly smuggling very classified documents on more than one occasion from the National Archives.
Now, I don't know for sure what to make of Berger's misdeeds, but it's clear that his best defense against criminality is an offensive to prove how sloppy and careless he was. He says that in the process of illegally sneaking the notes he made while reviewing classified material, he "inadvertently" stole several classified documents. He's since lost some of them. And the documents were far from random. He took all of the politically sensitive drafts of the after-action study on the Clinton Administration's response to the so-called Millennium Terror plot, which went to the heart of the Clinton administrations anti-terror policy.
Unfortunately for Berger, even his A-list spin team Clinton lawyers Lanny Breuer, Lanny Davis and former White House Press Secretary Joe Lockhart are having a hard time proving Berger was as dumb as he's claiming. According to various reports, Berger inadvertently took anywhere from four to five drafts of the same report, plus the final copy, over at least two different visits. Some witnesses claim he shoved documents down his pants, in his jacket and allegedly according to one witness in his socks. He says he accidentally carried the drafts and final copy away in a leather portfolio. Still, the drafts were somewhere between 15 and 30 pages each, so it's hard to believe he didn't notice swiping 75 to 180 pages.
It's like a 10-year-old telling his parents he knowingly stole $5 worth of candy but in the process he accidentally shoplifted a basketball. And this guy was the National Security Adviser.
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
And to think the Bush-whackers on the left have the nerve to call President Bush's administration incompetent.
Ah, Jonah's giving me an idea for a new name for this: Smugglegate.
bump
I think you're onto something!
"The innocent explanation is the most likely one"
This is one of my favorite Clinton quotes ever. It's right up there with the meaning of "is".
"Sandy, if you f&ck this up, she'll register us both into Fort Marcy Park."
In an interview with the Denver Post, Clinton stuck to the most "innocent explanation," that Berger's just a slob. "We were all laughing about it on the way over here," he told the paper. "People who don't know him might find it hard to believe. But ... all of us who've been in his office have always found him buried beneath papers."
Now, I've chatted with a few people who are very experienced in the rules and procedures governing the handling of classified documents. And many of them think this "innocent" explanation is the most damning. Berger was the head of the NSA, and he was in charge of countless documents like these when he was in the White House. And here Clinton is defending him by saying mistakes like these are just plain funny because they're so typical. Berger steals documents in the lead-up the 9/11 Commission hearings because - according to his lawyer! - he was too distracted stealing notes that he couldn't keep things straight. And Bill Clinton is laughing it off. Why? Because that's so like Sandy! He was always a slob with vital national security documents.
Mr. Berger has been a top advisor to the Kerry campaign. He resigned this week to stem the damage to the Democrats. But why didn't Berger tell Kerry he was being investigated? I guess being investigated by the Justice Department for his chicanery is as laughable - and therefore trivial - a subject as losing "password" class documents and sneaking past armed guards with notes crammed into your pants.
Now, nobody ever gives this administration the benefit of the "most innocent" explanation. George W. Bush is still called a liar every day, and the Kerry campaign still says Bush misled the country, even though two massive investigations - one in Britain and one by the Senate Intelligence Committee - have exonerated Bush of that charge and cast very harsh light on his accusers, like former Ambassador Joseph Wilson.
This election - according to every observer and even the campaigns themselves - will be focused on national security and the war on terror. But the Democrats and The New York Times are convinced the real scandal here isn't Berger's antics but the leak which revealed them. I cannot recall such concern about a single leak in the last year which hurt the Bush administration.
The central debate of this election is national security. Democrats charge that Bush has fumbled it. Republicans charge that the Democrats don't take it seriously enough. Fair debate.
But now comes a senior adviser to the Kerry campaign, who helped write the Democratic platform and who set anti-terror policy in the last administration. He's been caught in a scandal in which the most innocent defense they can mount is that he was so careless, so sloppy and so dismissive of the rules that he stole - and lost! - extremely sensitive documents by accident, while illegally smuggling others. And the last Democratic Commander-in-Chief says it's not only typical, it's funny.
That may be the most innocent explanation, but it's also evidence why these guys have their work cut out if they're going to convince voters they're serious about national security.
This cannot DIE !!!!!!!!1111111
defense against criminality is an offensive to prove how sloppy
***
Rush Limbaugh should do a "hang on Sloppy" parody song, it's a natural.
I finally realized who Berger reminds me of. Remember Michael J. Pollard, the character actor from the '60s & 70's who usually played some slow-witted retard (i.e. the idiot kid in Bonnie and Clyde)?
Berger looks like Pollard and behaves like his characters.
or maybe "hangin' sloppy ( by the neck )"
I have not so fond memories of platoon leaders and squad leaders being drummed out of the Army because they lost their "Confidential" communication codes during field exercises in Germany.
Classified documents were handled with great care at every unit I was assigned to. Why can't high-ranking civilians do the same?
Because he wasn't sloppy, he was trying to get rid of the evidence of his own incompetence as head of the NSA.
What is it with the krinton klan?
They spend a great deal of government time either putting things into their pants or pulling things out...
When I sat in front of my TV and saw the President of the United States, William Jefferson Clinton, look me straight in the eye and say, "It depends on what the meaning of the word IS, is," and the American public didn't scream for his impeachment post haste, I forever lost my faith in the American public.
This whole Berger thing smells like something from the Clinton era - do something illegal then laugh it off when you get caught. Liberals love that approach to politics, but if Berger were a Conservative the liberals would be pounding the GOP.
This story definitely has legs, but not in the liberal media.
I'm surprised that these sensitive documents weren't photocopied before being looked at by Berger. It shows a weakness in security protocol.
Bush doesn't want to touch this for various reasons-- he possibly didn't want to deal with it (possibly prefering to go against Iraq before going against Afghanistan or just didn't want to take the nation to war) or he respected the office of the presidency too much to throw X42 before the wolves (making us look like a Banana Republic) or some other reason. This Berger leak came from the Kerry camp.
No, Berger wouldn't risk this for his own legacy. He did this for someone else's legacy. He was trying to hide something bigger.
Fully in compliance with the minimum standards for the Clinton administration.
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.