OK, y'alls should invest in aluminum foil companies after reading my thoughts; Lord knows I've had to wrap a lot around my head to formulate this and keep those evil "thought modification waves" from influincing me. I've tried to keep up with this because all along I've had a gut feeling that something "isn't quite right" with this whole Plame incident. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to keep up much because of some personal/medical problems I've been having. BUT ...
First of all; those who are saying that Miller could plead the 5th ... Unless I'm mistaken, one can not plead the 5th before a Grand Jury. Like I said, I could be mistaken.
Here's the crux of my aluminum foil mental gymnastics:
1) On July 11 a thread was posted BACKSTORY: BERGER PLEADS GUILTY TO TAKING MATERIALS (this should fuel your outrage) that caught my eye. Reading Charlite's thread today got me to thinking that ...
2) What if the full story about the actual materials that Berger stole has not been told? Perhaps he had source documents which proved the "cake/Niger" connection, and Miller became privy to that information.
3) Berger was working on Kerry's campaign, and one of the favorite topics of Anti-Bushism that the Dems were crowing about, then and now, was that we had absolutely no proof about WMDs, although W had intelligence sources from England and others, which lead him to believe the opposite.
4) Perhaps Plame was acting "under orders" from She Who Holds the FBI Files, to send her husband on his bogus mission to investigate the Niger story; all the while "She Who Holds" would have her one of her sycophants concoct a story or scenario where Plame and hubby would be embroiled in a controversy that would cast a treasonous light on the Bush Admin by "blowing" Plame's "cover" and spinning the findings of incompetent puppet-hubby as "nothing to see here in Niger." -- (Yeah, I know this was years before, but most of the time Socialists/Commies don't work in a knee-jerk fashion -- they establish ground work months/years before to be called up, or not, depending on what they want to accomplish.)
5) Now, that the background was set, all that was needed was to find a means to implicate a top-level member of the Bush Admin and place him/her in a position that smells of treason, tying him/her to the President to make it appear that W MIHOP/LIHOP. They kept the pressure up by flooding top-level White House Staff with innane questions until they found one who gave a quote, or indication, of impropriety, and spin it into scenario spun out of whole cloth of the WH manipulating public opinion to back a phony WOT.
6) Unfortunately, Rove fell into this mess with an innocuous e-mail (or was it verbal reply). Anyway, legal sources say (and the lady who wrote the law sez) that what Rove did is a non-issue. (Also, remember how the far Left operates -- repeat a lie loud enough and often enough and it becomes "Truth".) However, the left-wing minions are dragging out all of their cheerleaders and bandying this Rovian non-issue up the flag pole in an attempt to smear treason on the Bush Admin, when, in fact, it was their Admin that blew the entire Osama deal to begin with.
7) From the BACKSTORY link, above:
"Rather than the "honest mistake" he described last summer, Berger acknowledged to U.S. Magistrate Deborah Robinson that he intentionally took and deliberately destroyed three copies of the same document dealing with terror threats during the 2000 millennium celebration. He then lied about it to Archives staff when they told him documents were missing. "Guilty, your honor," Berger responded Friday when asked how he pleaded.
Magistrate Deborah Robinson did not ask Berger why he cut up the materials and threw them away at the Washington office of his Stonebridge International consulting firm. Berger, accompanied by his wife, Susan, did not offer an explanation when he addressed reporters outside the federal courthouse following the hearing.
"It was a mistake and it was wrong," he said, refusing to answer questions.
Now, I don't know about you, but he destroyed 3 documents and we only have his word as to what those documents were. Granted one of the documents may have had to do with what he states ... but what of the other 2, or 3, or 4 ... how many we will never really know.
8) The last part of my tin-foil theory goes back to the time the Clintons held the White House hostage. Remember who their "good buddies" were all along time time they were on the presidential campaign and up until the time Bubba made his spectacular "Adios to the WH video"?? ... Yeah, the Thomason's ... Hollywood manipulators. Who better suited to formulate, along with one or two "intelligence types" a long-term set-up Wag The Dog scenario? (NB: And I don't think this is the only dirty trick scenario they've been cooking up since they've lost power -- well at least since they've been losing elections -- I'm not sure about the lost power.)
OK, there's more bouncing around underneath this aluminum foil cap I'm wearing, but I think I've taken up enough bandwidth LOL. You folks feel free to rip this scenario apart, as I know it's full of holes ... but I just wonder ... It just doesn't seem like a little set-up -- it really seems that this has the hallmarks of a very sophisticated operation. I don't think there was anything "innocent" about it or the Berger sox-stuffing story.
A lot of this was prompted by Liz' excellent BACKWATER thread linked above -- if you haven't read it yet, give it a look -- plus what you folks have been talking about here. I'm just not expert at devising air-tight scenarios LOL.
It could be reasonably postulated that the Berger pilfer was not covering for the Clintons as is commonly thought, but that the Archives theft was to reinforce Berger's usefulness as candidate John Kerry's national security advisor---to get something to use against GWB.
That possibility became more apparent when it was discovered that the US Pentagon traitor Lawrence Franklin gave US national security documents to AIPAC, and that candidate Kerry hired Steve Grossman, a past AIPAC president, as his key campaign advisor. Suspicions arose that candidate Kerry was being coached, and that somebody might have been leaking privileged national security information to Kerry in the effort to defeat President Bush.
Berger was serving as Kerry's national security consultant when he pilfered the classified US national security documents from the National Archives. So, the Berger theft may not be as originally suspected (a Clinton cover-up)----but an attempt to compromise the 2004 election to undermine George W Bush's reelection.
Americans ---that is to say the “little people”----need to know the extent of culpability engendered by these activities--- primarily whether our President was harmed ----and whether Sen Kerry and his advisors--- Steve Grossman and Sandy Berger---played any part in undercutting the reelection chances of President Bush through the use of stolen classified documents, and, of course, the degree to which spying impaired President Bush's ability to conduct US foreign policy. One of the most important questions Americans need to know about the connection between the Berger thievery, and the AIPAC-Pentagon treachery, is the degree to which these activities hurt President Bush and the president's 2004 campaign.
We should consider that Berger's thievery served several purposes:
(1) A coordinated attempt to coach Kerry----positioning Berger to get a Cabinet post if Kerry was elected, and if Hillary (gag) is elected.
(2) Covering up for the Clintons' pre-911 negligence.
(3) And finally, even after the Archives burglary, Berger was slithering around Washington involved in profiting from US government business in Iraq.
Berger's Firm to Aid Oil Interests in Iraq
By Judy Sarasohn
Washington Post Thursday, September 16, 2004; Page A29
Stonebridge International, the "global strategy firm" founded by Berger, has taken on an interesting client, Gulfsands Petroleum Ltd., a private Houston-based oil and gas company. Gulfsands, along with its larger partner Devon Energy Corp. of Oklahoma City, has oil and gas exploration and development interests in Syria. And now Gulfsands is looking to Iraq. "Stonebridge is assisting Gulfsands in organizing meetings in Washington with administration officials to discuss the company's business interests in Iraq and U.S. policy toward Syria," Stonebridge Vice Chairman H.P. Goldfield said in an e-mail response to written questions.
Remember, his Gulfsands office is the place where Berger cut up the classified Archives documents.
We should ponder this: when caught with the goods in his skivvies, Sandy Berger admitted to taking top secret documents the National Archives did not even know went missing. ....leading one to conclude, Berger took a lot more than he has been wont to reveal, a lot more than even the Archives knew about.
Berger's plea deal is conditioned on Berger's "cooperation." We need to make very certain that we, the people, got something in return for Berger's plea deal. Like for whose benefit the documents were being stolen, when was the order given, who was involved in the conspiracy, and who knew about it.
We demand to know:
(1) Have all the people who conspired with Berger been named and prosecuted?
(2) Did Berger actually destroy stolen docs--as he said---or are they being secreted for Berger's self-serving reasons: (a) for Hillary's campaign in exchange for Berger getting a political appointment, for (b) Berger's financial benefit in his oil consulting business, (c) to cover-up 9/11?
(3) Berger admitted to stealing documents the Archives did not list as missing .
(4) What did he do with them? Is his plea deal conditioned on Berger returning these as well?
(5) Who was in on the cover-up?
In an earlier public statement, Noel Hillman, chief of the Justice Department’s public integrity section, would not discuss Berger’s motivation, but said the former national security adviser understood the rules governing the handling of classified materials.
So why isn't the public allowed to share the info about Berger's motivation?? Why is Hillman holding this back? These compelling questions should be posed to the proper authorities.
Communicate your concerns about Berger's plea deal to the judge who wwas sent to sentence Berger July 8 (now postponed to September).
U.S. Magistrate Deborah Robinson
c/o US District Court
US Dept of Justice
Judiciary Center
555 4th Street NW
Washington, DC 20530
Phone (202) 514-6933
Caution: phone number listed is a prosecutor - keep messages short and civil.