Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

SANDY BERGER: I LIED, I DELIBERATELY DESTROYED DOCUMENTS ON TERRORISM POLICY
National Review ^ | April 1, 2005 | Jim Geraghty

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]


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: berger; coverup; sandyberger; whitewash
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-146 last
To: philman_36

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.
This makes no sense at all as the article states twice that everything taken was a copy.
...three of the five copies he took from the archives...
...Berger put a copy of the Clarke report ... (just which Clark report was it and where can the public view it at?)
If there were "damning facts" contained in these "copies" then they were/are still available for viewing by the public and should've been aired during The 9/11 Commission's precedings.
Why steal only copies of documents when stealing the original and all of the copies of those documents would be required to keep them from the public's view.
Berger had to know that. This just doesn't add up.

MARGIN NOTES!


141 posted on 04/03/2005 4:52:29 PM PDT by purpleland (The price of freedom is vigilance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: conservativecorner
Democrats: Constantly pushing the envelope of what is decent and good in America.

Destroying documents on Terrorism?!?!?!? AND- the Democrats have placed us and all of our children in harm's way for greed and power.

142 posted on 04/03/2005 4:56:37 PM PDT by Diva Betsy Ross (Code pink stinks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MamaLucci

You can bet a Republican would never be allowed access to sensitive papers again and would be shamed and driven out of ever holding any government position again.


143 posted on 04/03/2005 4:57:14 PM PDT by Twinkie (For it is written, even the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: digger48

Well, it's true. That Burglar got away with a fine and 3 year suspension is a sure sign that it is business as usual in DC. They are all on the same team, sorta like professional wrestling. They just put on a show to make it seem like they are on different sides.


144 posted on 04/03/2005 4:59:07 PM PDT by Critter (America, home of the whipped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DCPatriot

And she didn't even lie under oath.


145 posted on 04/03/2005 5:02:30 PM PDT by Critter (America, home of the whipped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: TruthNtegrity

Bookmarking


146 posted on 04/04/2005 12:43:21 PM PDT by TruthNtegrity (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-146 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson