Posted on 01/23/2007 9:53:28 AM PST by teddyballgame
As the FNC story points out, the document-filching Clinton aide did agree to take a polygraph test as part of a plea deal reached in September 2005. Now, some GOP lawmakers want to know why the Justice Department won't follow through:
The Justice Department should administer a polygraph test to former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger to find out what documents he took from the National Archives in 2002 and 2003, Rep. Tom Davis wrote in a letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales dated Monday. Davis, ranking Republican on the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, is leading a group of 18 lawmakers who say the Justice Department has been "remarkably incurious" about Berger's decision to remove documents relating to the Sept. 11 commission's inquiry into his role in helping prevent terror attacks during the Clinton administration.
"It is extraordinarily important that the Justice Department avail itself of its rights under the plea agreement and administer a polygraph examination to Mr. Berger to question him about the extent of his thievery.
(Excerpt) Read more at michellemalkin.com ...
How can one "refuse" a court order?............
What about Voice Stress Analysis?...........any good?.....
But yet Skooter Libby has to stand trial for failing to remember someting exactly correct...
nOPE.. NO DOUBLE STANDARD IN WASHINGTON
oR IT MIGHT BE A HAND-WRITTEN NOTE SAYING "HEY BILL- WHAT ABOUT THIS OSAMA GUY?"
Maybe so, but national security orgs use polygraphs all the time. Polygraphs are very bad for police work because they don't work on sociopaths. The premise of using them for national security is that you presume that most people who have gotten to that point are not full sociopaths (I know, I know) and that the fear of a polygraph will lead them to reveal the truth voluntarily.
Don't you just get sick to your stomach of the Clinton gang thumbing their noses at the justice system and absolutely nothing happening to them?
"Don't you just get sick to your stomach of the Clinton gang thumbing their noses at the justice system and absolutely nothing happening to them?"
Rules? Rules? Those are for the other people.
Sandy Berger and Able Danger.
'Brooklyn' was one of the covered up pieces of information about a jihadi cell.
When I first started FR, it was after 9/11. I didn't know how to save links and use keywords. So now I can't find the articles I know was posted on FR.
There was a contracting company working on the sprinkler system at the WTC.
I remember that contractor was from Brooklyn.
So, I went here to confirm it: http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-4.pdf
There are even more 'go betweens'. They hired outside consultants to gather information which inserted another wall.
All that is in the documents are the consulting firms that went and made reports and not gathered information directly from the people involved.
Hence, I can't find the information on the contractor. Just the consulting firm that made a report on it.
So the 9/11 commission won't have the contracting firm from "Brooklyn" which would raise an eyebrow about the 'Brooklyn' notes on the documents Berger took.
Yes. The Republicans wait until they have no power before demanding that the DOJ follow through on the plea agreement with Burglar; the Burglar refuses to keep his end of the agreement; the DOJ under a Republican President says "Fine with us."
Worse than a joke, but the Republicans, the DOJ, and Burglar all think they have fooled us. Does this remind anybody of the investigations into the treasonous leaks of info to the papers? The FBI is unable to investigate them because the agencies where the leaks occurred refuse to cooperate, and the FBI says, "Fine with us."
This whole thing is a farce. Berger should get the same consideration as Scooter Libby-a fair and public trial. He apparently knows where too many bodies are buried.
I took a masters course in investigations and had an acquaintance who was a polograph examiner in Norfolk, VA. I had many discussions both in class and with this guy about the practice.
Basically, he said it was just another way to conduct an interogation. The purpose of the interview was to get a confession and not determine the truthfulness of a persons statements. He told me that he was evaluated on the number of confessions he got and nothing else. Basically, window dressing.
Actually, I was thinking it was a Geraldo Special where after an hour of air time build up, Geraldo opens Sandy Berger's pants to see exactly what might be hidden there.
Yes, depending on the reaction to certain questions, you know which questions are causing the greatest physical reaction and you probe in that direction.
Polygraphs are pseudo-scientific trash, with no real validity. It's a sign of their incompetence that so many police agencies put any faith in them. They are not accepted as evidence in court. Notice that Burglar himself agreed to take one. It's just possible that the Injustice Dept. doesn't want to bother because they think he might pass. However, it's more likely that that they want to shove the matter under the rug. Scumbags all around. The Washington insiders protecting themselves from us.
This situation is what causes people to lose confidence in the gov't. What difference is there between dems and repubs? They both are out to cover their behinds in the 9/11 investigation, there is enough blame to go around, but they agree to hide relevant information from the public. The 9/11 commission was a whitewsash, and only the few brave House members who are on to this get no media coverage, and are derided as partisan hacks. Disgusting
Berger agreed to take the polygraph test as part of a plea bargain agreement. I could care less if it works or not, but if he is refusing to take the test he is in violation of his agreement and should be put in prison. It is up to him to prove that the test isn't reliable.
Has anyone even bothered to ask this Clinton rump swab WHY he detroyed the documents? I'm yet to hear an explanantion.
The article states that the Justice Dept. is not following through.
I read the article, thanks.
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.