Posted on 07/23/2004 9:37:06 PM PDT by conservative in nyc
ASHINGTON, July 23 - Officials at the National Archives were so concerned about Samuel R. Berger's removal of classified documents last year that they imposed new security measures governing the review of sensitive material, including the installation of full-time surveillance cameras, government officials said Friday.
The new policy, issued March 31 to security officers at the archives, lays out toughened steps for safeguarding research rooms used by nongovernmental employees who are given special access to classified material. And it demands "continuous monitoring" of anyone reviewing such material.
The restrictions were put in place as a direct result of the Berger episode, said a government official who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity surrounding the continuing investigation.
Mr. Berger, the national security adviser to President Bill Clinton, has acknowledged that he took several copies of classified documents from a secure reading room last year when preparing for testimony before the Sept. 11 commission. He said the removal was a careless mistake, but leading Republicans have accused him of stashing documents in his clothing intentionally, perhaps as a way of hiding information that could be considered damaging to the Clinton administration.
The Justice Department is conducting a criminal investigation to determine whether federal laws on the handling of classified material may have been broken, and the disclosure of the investigation this week forced Mr. Berger to step down as a senior foreign policy adviser to Senator John Kerry's presidential campaign. Democrats have accused the Bush administration of leaking word of the investigation and exaggerating its importance to distract attention from this week's final report of the Sept. 11 commission.
After the issue first flared on Tuesday, Mr. Berger told reporters outside his Washington office that he had made "an honest mistake" and that he deeply regretted it.
He has maintained a low profile since then, even as the political furor over the case has grown. An associate of Mr. Berger said Friday that "this is a situation that any human being would find difficult.''
"He's tired," the associate said, "and he's reading through lots of e-mails from friends and doing work and just trying to deal with all this."
National Archives officials have reached no judgments on Mr. Berger's motives in removing the documents, and one law enforcement official said, "We don't know what he was thinking when he did it."
Nonetheless, officials at the National Archives viewed the episode as troubling enough that they reviewed their security procedures and issued new guidelines for dealing with nongovernmental researchers like Mr. Berger.
The guidelines do not refer specifically to Mr. Berger or his case, but they emphasize careful monitoring of researchers, prohibit cellphones, hand-held computers and other electronic devices in classified research rooms, and limit the volume and type of material that researchers may review.
Archive security officials use surveillance cameras at many of their public research sites. But the archives did not have cameras at the classified site in Washington that Mr. Berger used, and no video was taken of his research, officials said.
Concern over his case led the archives to install a surveillance system in the Washington research room and any areas used for classified research, said a second government official who also spoke on condition of anonymity.
Susan Cooper, spokeswoman for the National Archives and Records Administration, said the agency routinely reviewed security procedures. But Ms. Cooper added that after the Berger episode, "it's fair to say that in light of the incident we took a look at what our procedures were and redid the guidelines and regulations to strengthen them."
The National Archives maintains about 25 public research sites around the country that allow researchers to sift through billions of pages of documents, the vast majority of them unclassified. For a small number of former senior government officials like Mr. Berger who retain security clearances, the agency also has separate classified research areas in Washington; College Park, Md.; and at some presidential libraries.
Mr. Berger, designated the Clinton administration's point man in reviewing documents for the Sept. 11 commission, visited the Washington research room three times in the summer and fall of 2003, spending a total of about 30 hours reviewing thousands of pages of classified documents, officials said.
After his second visit last September, security officials became suspicious because some copies of documents he reviewed appeared to be missing. Mr. Berger's lawyer, Lanny Breuer, said Mr. Berger later realized he had mixed in with his leather portfolio three or four versions of a lengthy classified report on terrorism. The report centered on millennium bombing plots in December 1999, and it concluded that counterterrorism efforts had not made a significant dent in Al Qaeda operations and that "sleeper cells" may have taken root in the United States, officials said.
Mr. Berger also acknowledged that he improperly put in his pockets some notes he wrote in reviewing the documents.
I've heard this level of secrecy surpasses that of nuclear confidentiality. Why Bergler isn't behind bars is astounding...
Berger's problem is a federal felony prosecution that won't be influenced in the least by anything the press says for or against him.
He's admitted stealing papers= one crime
Losing papers he stole=2'nd crime
Not having notes vetted=3'rd crime
Was this idiot playing the part of his own attorney since October of 03? And the unanwered question, did he pass on the info he stole to others?=major crime
This has as much truth in it as the one about not having a black box on Ron Brown's plane!!!
I don't know why they think they can stop people like the Clintons, et al, since they don't obey any rules or laws anyway. Making new ones won't bother them. It doesn't help that they always get away with it either. Start charging them and let's see if they don't stop. A few of them behind bars would go a long way to curbing their desire to break more laws.
Quote:
The new policy, issued March 31 to security officers at the archives, lays out toughened steps for safeguarding research rooms used by nongovernmental employees who are given special access to classified material.
Quote:
Nonetheless, officials at the National Archives viewed the episode as troubling enough that they reviewed their security procedures and issued new guidelines for dealing with nongovernmental researchers like Mr. Berger.
Quote:
For a small number of former senior government officials like Mr. Berger who retain security clearances, the agency also has separate classified research areas in Washington; College Park, Md.; and at some presidential libraries.
The Times is pulling its punches here, and being inaccurate.
As a former presidential appointee, Berger can obtain a clearance waiver from the document administrator (Bill Clinton) to review documents over which he had purview during his tenure.
"Former senior government employees" do not retain clearance unless actively engaged in some sort of classified government service, which by all accounts Sandy Berger is not (advising John Kerry's political campaign is not "government service").
To have clearance, Berger as a private citizen would need to be attached to some kind of actual and demonstrable government project and/or contract, and the entity employing him would sponsor his clearance and "hold his tickets." It's not like Joe Citizen just gets a generalized Top Secret clearance and walks around with clearances in their wallet. It's not like a driver's license.
When one leaves government service to the private sector, that person technically needs to obtain a new clearance (while it is true that previous clearance expedites a new clearance, that's not pertinent here). Clearance is not transferrable, and individuals do not "own" their clearance.
Also it's clear from the Archives description of its new measures that they are for "nongovernmental researchers" and that Berger was given "special access" to the materials.
Sandy Berger in no way, shape, or form retains "clearance", only the right to get clearance waivers to examine materials from his watch.
Who knows whether this is an honest mistake, or an attempt by the Times to divert us from the fact that Berger's clearance waiver was granted by Bill Clinton via Bruce Lindsey (which would be the formal stautory procedure).
The dilemma faced by the liberal media is that the more that they talk/spin this, the more it stays bumped to the top of the news...when they really want the scandal to just die and go away into the memory hole.
5 Legislative Days Left Until The AWB Expires
The local Seven Eleven has cameras on the Twinkies and the Snickers bars. Crazy world we live in.
Look, it's the responsibility of Bush's Justice Department to throw this piece of crap in prison. If they let him skate, we need to kick asses from Bush on down.
And I think they'll let him skate.
Maybe he's banking on a Presidential pardon.
[Laney] Breuer was hired in October, and in January former White House press secretary Joe Lockhart was enlisted to remain on standby if a public controversy blossomed. Link
Can someone explain to me why Berger has not been charged? It was 9 months ago, he admits he did it, what else does it take to bring charges? What is he doing, negotiating? If so, with what?
Exactly. Yet another freeper who claims to be in the know told me we have stuff in those rooms that we can't even dream about.
I personally do not believe that we would allow our nation's most sensitive secrets to be read by officials with regard to the nation's worst terrorist attacks WITHOUT cameras or other devices.
I'm going to ask two dumb questions. Can't and shouldn't his security clearances be revoked at a minumum? That would effectively end his prospective government career I'd think. Second, was the sock stuffing allegation based on eye-witness or video surveillance?
It seems like a pretty cut and dried case doesn't it? Maybe this is the October surprise Hillary was talking about. The Clintons knew about this months ago. They also know that Sandy is probably cooperating with the feds. The leak may have been a move to get the indictment moved up so that it happens during the summer rather than the fall.
Accusers are toast without video?
Balderdash.
This Pantload himself admitted to the crime. It's very unusual for a Clintonoid to admit to wrongdoing so they must have this sucker cornered like a rat in a trap.
There must be some sort of evidence to convict Berger,
otherwise why the leak by his lawyer, and why the quick resignation from Kerry's staff?
I'm expecting some sort of major newspaper expose, but when? If Berger gave classified info to Kerry, and Kerry disseminated it, then Kerry's in hot water too. (I smell a possible 'setup' of Kerry by 'Der Schlickmeister') But when do you drop the bomb for maximum effect? Sunday? Midweek?
When Rush was doing his "...your dreams will come true" bit during the week he said it to Dennis Kucinich supporters once. (I did not hear him use the phrase Friday and I listened for the full three hours) If there IS anything to it at all, could the revelation be so damning that Kerry will be forced to quit the race?
Awesome GIF!
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.