(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)
johnkerryisdangerousforamerica.blogspot.com
"I wish I knew who leaked it. It's interesting timing."
bill clinton
There were two major techniques that we used to implement McCurry's strategy of getting all the bad news out early and helping reporters write bad stories.
The first was overt and fully approved within the White House chain of command... "document dumps." The second method was covert, both to the outside world and within the "official" channels of the White House - the selective placement of certain stories and hot documents with a particular news organization, on "deep background," in a manner designed to minimize damage.
Usually our first choice was the Associated Press... John Solomon at the AP.
Lanny Davis
Scandal Management 101
the washington monthly
May 1999 - Volume 31 Issue
ne would have expected the Left to have caught on by now.
Their hero, bill clinton, derives his most perverse pleasure parading in their full, adoring, credulous view clinton torts, transgressions and trespasses while assigning the blame for said torts, transgressions and trespasses to his enemies.
He did it again yesterday when he told the media that it was not the substance of the charges against Sandy Berger that was important -- (the impeached ex-'president' dismissed Berger's breaches of national security as laughable -- imagine that ) -- but rather, that it was the timing of the leak, (not very artfully implying that it was Bush and the Republicans who did the leaking).
And the media myrmidons, reliably compliant, actually bought this bunk when any objective reading of recent American history would have required them to explore the substance of the charges, as well as the timing of the leak, as they apply to bill clinton--as they apply to both clintons, in fact.
Dubbed alternatively "Berglergate," "Pantsgate" and "Socksgate," (for reasons that will soon become apparent), the latest clinton scandal du jour bears all the essential eponymic earmarks.
FOX OR LUMMOX?
Sandy Berger, national security adviser under clinton, and John Kerry's adviser on matters of security until yesterday when the presumptive consumptive summarily dumped him, has been accused of, has been observed, and has confessed to, pilfering and destroying classified documents, stuffing them in his pockets, in his trouser legs, in his socks, in his briefs... and occasionally even in his briefcase.
Berger and his agents, familiar clinton operatives all, have simultaneously pled 'inadvertence,' 'quasi calculation,' 'semiconsciousness,' 'unconsciousness,' 'ignorance,' 'diligence' ('due' and otherwise), 'honest mistake,' 'sloppiness,' 'the fifth,' 'patriotism,' 'pro-antiterrorism,' 'dementia,' and, a doozie offered up by clinton, himself, (who should, after all, know): 'paper fetish.'
MEANS, MOTIVE, OPPORTUNITY... AND M.O.
The theory of the crime, simply put, is that the leak, as well as the initial orders to Berger, came from the clintons. The clintons had
- the means and opportunity--bill clinton has admitted that he knew about the charges "for months;" clinton has a 'working,' 'predicate stories' relationship with John Solomon and the AP.
- the motive--divert attention away from the crime, divert attention away from clinton terror failures, divert attention away from Kerry-Edwards, remind swing voters what scum the Left is, preempt Bush, blame Bush for leak
- M.O.--the leak--its substance, timing, and methods--is consistent with the clinton/John-Solomon/AP M.O.--and the original crime is consistent with the clintons' view of the law as it relates to them.
THE TIMING
The clinton rationale for the timing of leaks includes, if Soros et al. will pardon the expression, preemptive action. Assigning his criminal intentions to others, as psychopaths are wont to do, clinton expected Bush to leak the Berger thing to divert attention away from the 9/11 report; so clinton preemptively fed the story to his man at AP, John Solomon, with the understanding that Solomon would publish it several days before the report release date, which was also, as luck would have it, several days before the Kerry-Edwards Boston coming-out party.
LEFTIST CANARD
To explain away clear criminality, clinton is advancing the Left's most popular Pantsgate canard after "sloppiness made him do it."
Clinton is claiming that there could be no nefarious reason for removing and destroying the documents, that removing and destroying the documents would, in fact, be pointless because doing so would not purge the records of material harmful to clinton as the National Archives retains copies of all documents.
This claim is simply not true.
Sandy Berger seemed to have been fixated on the various draft versions of only one document, the NSC's highly critical after-action report on the clinton administration's handling of al-Qaeda terror threats during--and after--the December 1999 millennium celebration.
Berger repeatedly returned to the National Archives and removed additional draft versions of that same document. Those draft copies, by definition, differed from the final version. No copies of the drafts reside in the National Archives. Some draft versions are still missing. What was in those draft versions that compelled Berger and clinton to risk everything to remove them?
In his public testimony before the 9/11 Commission the other day, Attorney General John Ashcroft exposed Commissioner Jamie Gorelick's role in undermining the nation's security capabilities by issuing a directive insisting that the FBI and federal prosecutors ignore information gathered through intelligence investigations. But Ashcroft pointed to another document that also has potentially explosive revelations about the Clinton administration's security failures. Ashcroft stated, in part:
The NSC's Millennium After Action Review declares that the United States barely missed major terrorist attacks in 1999 &emdash; with luck playing a major role. Among the many vulnerabilities in homeland defenses identified, the Justice Department's surveillance and FISA operations were specifically criticized for their glaring weaknesses. It is clear from the review that actions taken in the Millennium Period should not be the operating model for the U.S. government.
In March 2000, the review warns the prior Administration of a substantial al Qaeda network and affiliated foreign terrorist presence within the U.S., capable of supporting additional terrorist attacks here.
Furthermore, fully seventeen months before the September 11 attacks, the review recommends disrupting the al Qaeda network and terrorist presence here using immigration violations, minor criminal infractions, and tougher visa and border controls.
These are the same aggressive, often criticized law enforcement tactics we have unleashed for 31 months to stop another al Qaeda attack. These are the same tough tactics we deployed to catch Ali al-Marri, who was sent here by al Qaeda on September 10, 2001, to facilitate a second wave of terrorist attacks on Americans.
Despite the warnings and the clear vulnerabilities identified by the NSC in 2000, no new disruption strategy to attack the al Qaeda network within the United States was deployed. It was ignored in the Department's five-year counterterrorism strategy.
I did not see the highly-classified review before September 11. It was not among the 30 items upon which my predecessor briefed me during the transition. It was not advocated as a disruption strategy to me during the summer threat period by the NSC staff which wrote the review more than a year earlier.
I certainly cannot say why the blueprint for security was not followed in 2000. I do know from my personal experience that those who take the kind of tough measures called for in the plan will feel the heat. I've been there; I've done that. So the sense of urgency simply may not have overcome concern about the outcry and criticism which follows such tough tactics."
Mark R. Levin
... [T]he Commission should study carefully the National Security Council plan to disrupt the al Qaeda network in the U.S. that our government failed to implement fully seventeen months before September 11.
Millennial Mistake
Jamie Gorelick's dangerous "wall of separation"
National Review Online
April 15, 2004, 4:34 p.m.
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2004
