Skip to comments.SANDY BERGER: I LIED, I DELIBERATELY DESTROYED DOCUMENTS ON TERRORISM POLICY
Posted on 04/02/2005 6:17:05 AM PST by conservativecorner
The Powerliners are not happy with the Sandy Berger plea deal. But I'm a little surprised that Burglar - I mean, Berger - admitted so much. From today's Post:
Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, a former White House national security adviser, plans to plead guilty to a misdemeanor, and will acknowledge intentionally removing and destroying copies of a classified document about the Clinton administration's record on terrorism. ...
The deal's terms make clear that Berger spoke falsely last summer in public claims that in 2003 he twice inadvertently walked off with copies of a classified document during visits to the National Archives, then later lost them.
He described the episode last summer as "an honest mistake." Yesterday, a Berger associate who declined to be identified by name but was speaking with Berger's permission said: "He recognizes what he did was wrong. . . . It was not inadvertent."
That all sounds pretty damning. But then you read the actual consequences:
Under terms negotiated by Berger's attorneys and the Justice Department, he has agreed to pay a $10,000 fine and accept a three-year suspension of his national security clearance. These terms must be accepted by a judge before they are final, but Berger's associates said yesterday he believes that closure is near on what has been an embarrassing episode during which he repeatedly misled people about what happened during two visits to the National Archives in September and October 2003. What? Just what do you have to do to get your clearance pulled permanently? Start the clock, he can go back and start deleting memos that make him and his colleagues look bad starting in 2008 or so!
The details of this story are even more damning:
Rather than misplacing or unintentionally throwing away three of the five copies he took from the archives, as the former national security adviser earlier maintained, he shredded them with a pair of scissors late one evening at the downtown offices of his international consulting business. The document, written by former National Security Council terrorism expert Richard A. Clarke, was an "after-action review" prepared in early 2000 detailing the administration's actions to thwart terrorist attacks during the millennium celebration. It contained considerable discussion about the administration's awareness of the rising threat of attacks on U.S. soil.
Although one element of this story apparently is a bit of an urban legend:
On Sept. 2, 2003, the associate said, Berger put a copy of the Clarke report in his suit jacket. He did not put it in his socks or underwear, as was alleged by some Republicans last summer. Now... what about this deafening silence that we have heard on this from Berger's associates, since this story first surfaced? Will we be seeing any criticism of him from former President Clinton, Madeline Albright, Hillary, John Kerry, or any other prominent Democrat? Is the perception that this is no big deal, standard operating procedure for that White House, and is something to be swept under the rug?
Do any Democrats want to confront the unpleasant truths of how the Clinton White House handled terrorism?
Because there were some facts out there that were so damning, Sandy Berger was willing to break the law to make sure the public never saw them.
[Posted 04/01 04:38 AM]
Now if his name was Nixon he would be a crook.
Fat chance. He has Democratic immunity.
Any mere citizen would be thrown in jail for life after they were prosecuted under the Patriot Act.
Bush looses more creditability by letting the Justice Department cut this deal with this thief.
I was dismayed that his security clearance will be suspended for only three years. If they're not going to give him jail time, they should at least (fer cryin' out loud) refuse to ever let him near sensitive material again! The man is a menace.
(And I'm sure everyone is here is, like me, simply SHOCKED that it wasn't "inadvertant"--NOT!)
He's a crook no matter what his name.
Berger purloined all draft revisions of a key critique of the government's response
to the millennium terrorism threat, a document that detailed Administration knowledge
and inaction regarding al Qaeda presence in the U.S. in 1999
and 2000. Stolen were crucial notes in the margins of these drafts
which reveal the thinking and agendas of the
Clinton Administration relating to the mounting terrorist threat.
Washington Post, "Berger Quits as Advisor to Kerry", Susan Schmidt
Berger was not qualified as NSA.
He was a millionaire lawyer and lobbyist with a career centered on expanding trade with China.
Tom Laughlin, http://www.billyjack.com/jung/08_politics/articles/990515_spy.html
Former FBI Director Louis Freeh opined that
Burger was a public-relations hack, interested in how something would play in the press .
The New Yorker, per http://www.nationalreview.com/lowry/lowry200311030753.asp
Dick Morris noted Berger seemed to work overtime
at opposing tough measures against terror,
advising vetoes of legislation aimed at crippling Iranian terror funding
and working to block antiterror sanctions.
Wall Street Journal, "While Clinton Fiddled", Dick Morris, http://www.opinionjournal.com/forms/printThis.html?id=95001824
Berger repeatedly rebuffed Sudanese offers to hand Osama bin Laden
to the United States in a deal brokered by a $900,000 contributor to Democrat campaigns.
Source 1 - National Review, "Clinton & Khobar", Rich Lowry
Source 2 - Washington Times, "Miniter Responds", Richard Miniter
Berger was the "go-to" man regarding China policy
when Communist Chinese money was being funneled into Democrat Party coffers
in exchange for policy concessions, strategic nuclear technology,
and all pending patent applications at the US Patent Office.
The Hill, "Fundraiser resurfaces from 1996", Sam Dealey
Hey, it only took 4 posts to hook a Bush-blamer!
Well, maybe in addition to the slap on the wrist he received, he would have had to wear an ankle bracelet for 10 days if he hadn't fessed up to at least something.
That is, if they could fit one around his ankle.
This way he cannot be pleading his innocence.
The problem is, it wouldn't keep you or me out of jail,
and his "punishment" is a joke.
And keep him out of the government.
I wonder which TV Network will be the first to interview this lying "Clinton devotee and protector" S-- for his view and opinion on the next US foreign affair or event.
The prAna Recon Stretch Pant begs to be worn to the crag on cool days. The robust Recon Stretch Pant's heavyweight 11 oz. Bedford corduroy construction is blended with 2% lycra to give it a slight stretch, plenty for a scramble approach or a tricky move. Ergonomic front and lower leg panels and an asymmetrical rear pocket add style, while a zip fly, brass rivets, and quick-release belt system finish it off.
What happened to all of the Watergate burglars? What were some of their sentences?
Sandy Burglar should be doing hard time as well! His crimes could have affected an election, too. If prison time was good enough for Watergater's, then it's good enough for him as well. WHEN IS OUR SIDE GOING TO STAND UP? (Sorry for shouting, but this angers me!) This was more than saving Clinton's legacy. This was a serious crime!!!!!
Researchers who work the National Archives are perfectly aware of the penalties that can be prescribed in case of theft. With this slap on the wrist autography hunters are going to have a field day purloining archived material.
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.