Posted on 04/08/2005 1:38:29 PM PDT by Libloather
Sandy Berger... former National Security Advisor and Thief of Classified Documents, Receives slap on the Wrist As Bureaucracy covers for "it's own"
DojGov.net Newswire
6 April 2005
The Justice Department said yesterday there was no evidence that former national security adviser Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger was trying to conceal information when he illegally took copies of classified terrorism documents out of the National Archives in 2003. This is in spite of the fact that he stole classified documents, destroyed them and lied about his actions in an attempt to revise historical events.
Under an agreement with US Department of Justice officials, Burger pleaded guilty to the relatively minor charge of taking classified documents without authorization. This is a misdemeanor that will likely require him to pay a $10,000 fine and court fees. His plea acknowledged he had misled archives officials when initially questioned about the missing documents and falsely claimed it was "an honest mistake." The "honest mistake" involved hiding the documents in his coat and socks, although that was not stated in his admission.
Noel L. Hillman, chief of the Justice Department's public integrity section, said Berger "did not have an intent to hide any of the content of the documents" or conceal facts from the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. But he did hide the document copies in his coat jacket as he left the archives after two visits in September and October 2003. "As a former high-ranking government official, he knew and understood that what he did was wrong," Hillman said.
In acknowledging the crime to Magistrate Judge Deborah A. Robinson, Berger said he knowingly took five copies of different versions of the same classified document -- briefings for the Clinton administration on terrorism threats -- from the National Archives in the fall of 2003. Berger admitted to destroying three of the copies, and returned the remaining two to archives officials and said he had "misfiled" them.
At the very least, Berger was primarily guilty of arrogance, presuming that as former presidential national security adviser and party to bureaucratic privilege, he should be allowed to steal classified information.
Berger has agreed to pay a $10,000 fine and accept a three-year suspension of his security clearance, a sentence prosecutors endorsed.
It was noted that Berger only had copies of the documents (although he thought that they were originals) and so was not charged with the more serious crime of destroying documents.
Friends of Berger said he hopes the embarrassing episode does not badly tarnish his reputation as he never showed disloyalty or criticized the federal bureaucracy.
The FBI began investigating Berger in October 2003. The criminal investigation prompted Berger's resignation as a senior foreign policy adviser to 2004 Democratic nominee John F. Kerry.
The last time I checked - "presuming" never really meant a whole lot while being charged with a felony.
I'm still wondering - if stealing classified information doesn't put Sandy behind bars, what would?
If Berger was a Republican, this would have turned into a scandal of Watergate proportion. Why are the Democrats better at this than the Republicans? Is it the MSM?
Why are the Democrats better at this than the Republicans? Answer: Yes! They are master deceiversand manipulators.
Is it the MSM?Answer: Berger could have sold classified documents directly to the Chinese military and the MSM would utterly ignore this. (Actually this probably did occur)
Why are the Democrats better at this than the Republicans? Answer: Yes! They are master deceiversand manipulators.
Is it the MSM?Answer: Berger could have sold classified documents directly to the Chinese military and the MSM would utterly ignore this. (Actually this probably did occur)
I believe 'Mr. Berger' received a slap on the wrist for agreeing to cooperate with an ongoing investigation.
The Gov wants who Mr Berger took docs for.
Coat jacket, my rear! He stuffed documents down his underwear even!
Why don't they use the excuse that the men's room was out of toilet paper and Berger was desperate? And that's why he destroyed the documents afterwards instead of returning them!
Criminy, the MSM is so corrupt that they gleefully cheered Charles Colson's 18 month sentence for 1 missing FBI folder, but were dead silent about the 900+ FBI folders that mysteriously turned up after 2 missing years on a coffee table in the Clinton White House. The MSM would have gone into hysterics if a Republican had been caught stuffing his BVDs with classified documents.
And the MSM still doesn't get it why we cheered when Dan Rather was caught with his pants down. It was way past time.
"I believe 'Mr. Berger' received a slap on the wrist for agreeing to cooperate with an ongoing investigation.
The Gov wants who Mr Berger took docs for."
I think you're an optimist, but I hope you're right.
"...there was no evidence that former national security adviser Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger was trying to conceal information..."
If that's the case, Mr. Hillman, why did Berger lie to the FBI? Hillman seems to think that he is on Berger's defense team. This is a monumental miscarriage of justice.
The Gov wants who Mr Berger took docs for.
I've read that also, and I really, really want to believe it.
Chong and Martha go to jail. Berger steals our history, and Bush covers for him.
What if Berger's lying about destroying the docs...?
My thoughts exactly. I suspect he sold the documents since he has produced no evidence that he destroyed them. The question is who did he sell them to?? The Chicom, the Saudis, Iran, who??
Why is Johnathan Pollard in prison?
A magistrate is a civil officer who holds executive, legislative, or judicial authority. It commonly refers to lower court justices, such as justices of the peace. Federal magistrates are appointed by District Court judges to hear and decide pre-trial motions, conduct hearings, and submit proposed findings of fact and recommendations to the District Court judges. The term may be used generically to refer to any judge of a court, or anyone officially performing a judge's functions.
Yet another angle to consider...
I don't think he sold them. I think he gave them to whomever sent Sandy in after them. After all, would anyone in his right mind take Berger's word that he, Berger, had destroyed the evidence? And Sandy said he did it with scissors? Like the guy doesn't own a shredder? Or have some matches handy?
Something is very odd about this case.
Even the Wall Street Journal editorialized today to the effect of "Nothing to see here. Move along."
Berger's behavior was bizzare and has not been explained. Why would the WSJ editorial page call anyone interested in the "why" of Berger's outlandish conduct a conspiracy nut?
I don't know the answer to your question, but I do know she has not accepted the deal.
Next court appearance for Berger is July 8.
Sounds like another dose of "compassionate conservatism" puke this administration and in particular the Justice Dept. is famous for.
Where is the outrage???
"Poor little" Martha Stewart got railroaded for a whole lot less and please don't blubber it was because she fibbed to the Feds. This creep blatantly and with full knowledge of his intent and purpose, with the arrogance of old scumbag himself, lied to the American people and flat got away with it.
Again where is the justice?
For shame, for shame!
For the second time this week, the WSJ is covering for the Sandburglar. My subscription is about up.
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.