Posted on 01/15/2005 12:50:51 AM PST by kattracks
Well, some of those top Democrats now find themselves being grilled by the grand jury — with more to come.
Who else has been before the grand jury, besides Bruce Lindsey? Who else is going to have to testify?
LOL! I was beginning to fear that limerick writing was a dead art - thanks for showing that it's still alive and kicking!
New York Sun
Date: Jul 23, 2004
Section: Editorial & Opinion Page:10
Title: The Boldness of the President
The (911 Commission) reports ......states that Mr. Berger was presented with plans to take action against the threat of Al Qaeda four separate times — Spring 1998, June 1999, December 1999, and August 2000. Each time, Mr. Berger was an obstacle to action. Had he been a little less reluctant to act, a little more open to taking pre-emptive action, maybe the 2,973 killed in the September 11, 2001, attacks would be alive today (snip).
So have the MSM who couldn't get enough of the Novak-Plame brouhaha, but cannot find the least interest in a real national security breach.
It's the best some of us can do!
;-)
Well, some of those top Democrats now find themselves being grilled by the grand jury — with more to come.
This is a story that needs to be "vetted" -- for weeks or maybe months.
A 2nd reading of the article reveals this closing line --"and hold those responsible for this outrage accountible."
Now THAT sounds as if they're going after the secretaries or cops who allowed Berger to sneak the stuff out, rather than the Sneaker himself. And THAT would be typical democratic behavior.
Blame Tripp instead of Lewinsky
Blame Starr instead of clinton
Blame the Librarian, instead of the Thief.
Crime only applies to the Republicans. Democrats are not responsible for their actions in the notable CPUSA agenda. America would be better off is all democrats were exiled to Siberia except Zell Miller.
Bruce Lindsey, the Clinton's consigliere, has already appeared before them.
Sandy Berger has not yet been questioned, although he attempted a plea bargain, which did not work.
There is more going on than you realize. There was a huge thread on this grand jury last week.
Kudos to The New York Post for keeping this story "alive".
Absolutely right!
1/11
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20050111-092927-5236r.htm
'The investigation into why Berger illegally sneaked top-secret documents out of the archives has been quietly progressing for months. At the time Berger was Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry's top foreign policy adviser.
"It may have been off the front pages, but the investigation has been active," said a source told the Post.
Berger admitted he removed as many as 50 top-secret documents from the archives, calling it an an "honest mistake" made while he vetted documents for the Sept. 11 commission's inquiry into the terror attacks on New York and Washington. He also acknowledged he destroyed some documents, but claimed it was by accident.
The pilfered documents were classified "Code Word," the highest security classification, above Top Secret.
Some Republicans, including House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., have charged the documents were taken because they might embarrass the former president.
The investigation, which has been characterized as "a criminal probe," is being conducted by career prosecutors at the Justice Department, sources said.
what made Sandy do it?
5/7/2004
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200405070941.asp
....'Justice Department officials knew the story was a bit different. They knew the potential bomber in that case had been caught by luck, not as a result of savvy antiterrorism work. Justice also know that the Clinton administration had done an "after action" review of the millennium matter — a study conducted by none other than Richard Clarke, the White House counterterrorism chief-turned-Bush antagonist.
The review was "a scathing indictment of the last administration's actions," says the administration source. "It was exactly how things shouldn't be run." Indeed, Clarke is quite critical of the handling of the millennium plot in his book, Against All Enemies.
The virtue of Ashcroft's testimony is that he came out and said it. "This [National Security Council] millennium after action review declares that the United States barely missed major terrorist attacks in 1999 and cites luck as playing a major role," Ashcroft testified. "It is clear from the review that actions taken in the millennium period should not be the operating model for the U.S. government."'...
To hell with the Dems, I expect their reaction, Where is the Repubs reaction? Somebody on capital hill should be shouting and throwing a fit every chance they get. Why is it we don't fight fire with fire in D.C.? Berger is a prime candidate for the firing squad if you ask me. Since when do we treat major security breaches like a kid losing his homework?
I guess nothing in the world is ever going to wake up the MSM on serving the American people either. If this had been a Republican it would never get off the daily top news stories or the front page until the perpetrator was dead and buried. You would think sooner or later they would be shamed into reporting stories like this. It defies all logic for me to think some vice president in charge of presenting the news to the American public is sitting at his $4,000 mohogany desk and gives the Dems a pass on stealing top secret government documents. What the hell does he or she think is their reposibility to the job?
Good morning!
I'm just signing on and see this ping. Haven't read a thing else yet, so off I go to do so.
Well, let's walk through it and the odds go up up up that you're right:
The 9/11 Commission was formed out of a partisan demand and right off the bat charges that "Bush Knew". You can bet Clinton was one of the masterminds of that tactic.
Then, under the guise of refreshing his mind on impending testimony before this vaunted group, Berger goes to the Archives on behalf of Clinton and reviews papers---takes notes and leaves with those on his person, which is also against the rules/law, plus the infamous stealing of actual documents.
Clinton covers for him talking about how Sandy is an absent-minded clutterbug who was forever strewing papers about (how reassuring to hear about a former National Security Advisor) and he helps form the Sandy defense circle.
There is strong evidence that information obtained from reviewing classified documents found its way into Kamp Kerry (it would have ended up in whoever ended up being the dem nominee, IMO) and was used for partisan purposes.
No, I don't think Sandy Berger took papers to cover his own rear or start his own private collection. I've thought from the start he was the runner for the person you named.
I join in your desire to see him before the grand jury...and more.
One of the extremely frustrating aspects of that whole administration was constantly being treated to the "but we're just incompetents, not corrupt!" defense.
And the media thought this was fine.
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.