Posted on 07/27/2004 5:47:58 PM PDT by True Capitalist
Banned In Boston
Investor's Business Daily
National Security: Why has Sandy Berger fallen out of the news cycle? Oh, that's right: He didn't give some hapless detainee a wedgie at Abu Ghraib in Baghdad.
Blaming Berger's absence on the flood of news coming from the Democratic National Convention would be too easy. Fact is, there's no better time for the media to continue looking into the former national security adviser's alleged filching of classified documents from the National Archives.
Berger, who explains himself as the "inadvertent" lifter of sensitive government material, has several direct links to the party -- and Party -- in Boston.
Not only was he President Clinton (news - web sites)'s right-hand man on security matters. He also was -- until he resigned July 21 -- a top foreign-policy adviser to the Kerry campaign and in line for a Cabinet position in a Kerry administration.
Were Berger a Republican, even one of out office, his behavior would be a news obsession, convention or no. The networks and mainstream press couldn't possibly pass up a link so juicy.
No doubt Democrats are upset over the Berger affair. But not for any possible wrongdoing or security risk he might have created.
No, their concern is the timing of the revelation that Berger is the target of a criminal probe. Those dirty Republicans must have leaked the news just to take the focus off a 9-11 commission report that was sure to be embarrassing to Bush. Only it wasn't.
This, however, might be an embarrassment to Democrats: World magazine quotes Rep. Curt Weldon (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., as noting, "This is the second time now that we have a documented case of Berger mishandling classified information."
In January 1999, Weldon said, he sent an advance copy of a security report to Berger for the national security chief to review.
According to Weldon, Berger pre-released information to the media to put a "White House spin on what was still a classified document."
Weldon was so incensed by Berger's actions that he took to the House floor to complain about "the outrageous and curious behavior of our so-called national security adviser."
So Berger is a serial abuser of federal law and protocol? Or is he just a bumbling plumber trying to cover the foolish calls he made while national security adviser?
We ask because it appears that some of the classified material he allegedly stuffed into his pants and socks was a draft showing he rejected plans to attack an al-Qaida camp in January 2000.
Surely the media elite should cover that possibility as feverishly as they covered the possibility that someone high in the Bush administration approved the torture of prisoners at Abu Ghraib.
But no, there are bigger fish to fry, such as those being served up at this week's scripted Bush roast in Boston.
serial abuser of federal law and protocol
IBD bump.
Surely there is a way that Freepers, working together, can keep this before administration and congressional leaders.
We need to DEMAND justice.
See, this is the thing. The alphab-nets have NEVER been so openly partisan. That's fine, as far as it goes. But they insist upon the Big Lie - that they are not deathly partisan. And the lie is now just over the top. Everyone sees it. And the lie, I think, is going to cost the Kerry campaign on election day. People are going to vote - not hate-Bush, but hate-leftwing-media. We'll see.
I have to agree that it will cost them. They are just digging the hole deeper and deeper. It's actually been kind of smart of the Bush campaign to let the opposition fully define itself through it's actions.
Quick, someone Photoshop a picture of Sandy Burglar standing in front of a jihadist with panties on his head!
Exactly. The election will be a referendum on the media. And the media know it, too. If Kerry wins, they will see that as a vote of acclamation (sp.?) on their domination. Conversely, if the media lose, all kinds of interesting developments may follow. I'm sure conservative activists will be heartened. But whether any media bosses will openly, honestly, consider the ramifications of a lost election is another matter entirely.
The death penalty, it is claimed by its opponents, does not deter crime. It does, however, render those who secumb to it unable to commit more crime.
The logic of that analysis seems airtight, so, is it unreasonable to believe that if the Clinton administration had killed B Laden, that New York and the Pentagon may have been spared? I use may have been spared because we just don't know but the odds do not favor a dead man committing more crime. Perhaps his surrogates could thrive long enough to strike out in an effort to seek vengeance, but once a snake's head has been cut off, the body is rendered useless.
Ssssshhhhhhh. Don't tell them. They're watching FR and scribbling out Hate Bush comments from this week's love-in.
ping
He's something much worse than a bumbler. I know Berger for just what he is - a political climber in a position of trust he did not earn and of which he is not worthy, as events have proven.
You see a lot of these guys if you deal in intelligence. They have no regard for the backbreaking effort it took, or the lives that were at risk, to produce the piece of paper before him, and his first thought is not how to protect its accuracy and integrity by safeguarding it but for what sordid political gain he can procure by arrogating to himself the right to release it against all the promises he signed, against all the warnings he received, and against all the rules he agreed to abide by. This is no ignorant rube, he's the former head of the NSA, and there is no excuse, NONE, for this level of irresponsibility. He'll get away with it because the powerful who his theft benefit will protect him, and that is what is wrong with the system.
I think here on this thread there is overconfidence in the average voter's immunity to MSM. In order to get part of story left out by MSM, one could listen to Rush Limbaugh, but not enough voters do that.
I think here on this thread there is overconfidence in the average voter's immunity to MSM. In order to get part of story left out by MSM, one could listen to Rush Limbaugh, but not enough voters do that.
It may seem a bit idealistic, but I would like to think that bthe average American voter WILL be able to read through some of the lies and deceits perpetrated by these slimes. Let's just pray that some of them can have an awakening before November 2nd.
Alleged my backside..he admitted it!
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.