I am STILL trying to figure out why this little dirtbag is getting his security clearance back...
...but then I have the SAME question about Pat Leahy, and also am still wondering why they let Leahy slide, criminally, for the trangressions which earned him the moniker ‘Leaky Leahy’ and caused the deaths of several of America's 'friends'. http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/3/13/202146.shtml
[I am STILL trying to figure out why this little dirtbag is getting his security clearance back... ]
They just manage to do whatever they want. You would have to ask someone more knowledgeable than me about all the clearance stuff.
The only thing that adds up is that Berger has them over a barrel. Perhaps he did not destroy the documents he said he destroyed. If you knew the Clintons' heart like Berger must know, he would have had to go to the national archieves with the thought he would never get caught, however should he get caught, it seems reasonable, given the foreknowlege tha Hillary was going to run for president, that he might need a get out of jail free card. He knows very well that the Clintons play hardball. Perhaps it is not archives document which Mr.Clinton sent Berger to get and erase. I would think it would be a physical item which would threaten the Clintons because if it was only head knowledge...will the vince scenario would erase the threat. But if he told them to make it right by Berger and give him a job and give him a position in the upcoming administration, or he would show the world their depravity. In other words the only thing that makes sense is that Berger is blackmailing Hillary. She is not that politically sophomoric to insult millions and millions of voters and put her supporters in the untenable position of trying to defend the politically stupid maneuver of hiring Mr.Berger. Clinton loyalty, historically, runs one way. Their supporters are loyal to the clintons. The Clintons have never demonstrated this type of loyalty to their supporters.
The other thing that makes me conclude this is that, even if the Clintons were inclined to 'help' Mr.Berger, their friend, NOW is exactly the wrong time politically to do so. Nothing is yet set in stone regarding her candidacy. She just gave Obama and Edwards raw meat to flail away at her corruption. She dissed Pelosi and her mantra of 'politics of corruption'. This resurrection of Berger makes null and void the Scooter Libby issue.
Why would people like the Clintons do this? That is the question. Not that they did it, buy why did they do this, at this time, and for what purpose?
The only thing that adds up is that Berger has them over a barrel. Perhaps he did not destroy the documents he said he destroyed. If you knew the Clintons' heart like Berger must know, he would have had to go to the national archieves with the thought he would never get caught, however should he get caught, it seems reasonable, given the foreknowlege tha Hillary was going to run for president, that he might need a get out of jail free card. He knows very well that the Clintons play hardball. Perhaps it is not archives document which Mr.Clinton sent Berger to get and erase. I would think it would be a physical item which would threaten the Clintons because if it was only head knowledge...will the vince scenario would erase the threat. But if he told them to make it right by Berger and give him a job and give him a position in the upcoming administration, or he would show the world their depravity. In other words the only thing that makes sense is that Berger is blackmailing Hillary. She is not that politically sophomoric to insult millions and millions of voters and put her supporters in the untenable position of trying to defend the politically stupid maneuver of hiring Mr.Berger. Clinton loyalty, historically, runs one way. Their supporters are loyal to the clintons. The Clintons have never demonstrated this type of loyalty to their supporters.
The other thing that makes me conclude this is that, even if the Clintons were inclined to 'help' Mr.Berger, their friend, NOW is exactly the wrong time politically to do so. Nothing is yet set in stone regarding her candidacy. She just gave Obama and Edwards raw meat to flail away at her corruption. She dissed Pelosi and her mantra of 'politics of corruption'. This resurrection of Berger makes null and void the Scooter Libby issue.
Why would people like the Clintons do this? That is the question. Not that they did it, buy why did they do this, at this time, and for what purpose?