The Berger smoke screen

[Todd33]

The more I read, the more it looks like yet another Rove-type smear campaign.

Disclaimer: Berger took documents, there is an investigation. If charge and found guilty, punish him. Not the point of this thread.

1. Took copies of documents that he either wrote or worked on directly during the Clinton years.

2. Investigation is 8 months old, he has not been charged with anything.

3. Justice dept. is Ashcroft, the strong arm of the Bush administration. Not exactly non-partisan.

4. Leaked two days before the 9/11 report after 8 months of no pulic outcry. Ashcroft and the White house knew, who leaked it?

5. Republicans (all the attack dogs, they all got the "memo") come out strong and coordinated, claiming cover-up, links to Kerry and his speeches, etc.

I had to ask myself a few questions. Who had the most to gain from the leak, who had the most to lose?

Why would Berger take documents and give them to Kerry, Kerry has the clearance to read them from his position on various committees in the Senate. How would it help a stump speech?

Cover up? How does stealing copies of documents that the 9/11 commission has help cover up anything? I just don't see it.

Berger has been cooperating with the investigation for 8 months. If he knew this was bad, would he not have severed ties from the Kerry campaign a long time ago?

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck it probably is a duck. Or in this case another right wing smoke screen to draw attention from real problems.

 

[kylebisme]

it makes a good story for our "liberal" media though.

 

[ajf3]

Do we know for sure that the only documents he could have possibly taken were copies? If so, I agree not that big a deal. However, if he may have taken an original - of which no copy existed then that's a different story.

 

[Crimson]

Originally posted by: ajf3
Do we know for sure that the only documents he could have possibly taken were copies? If so, I agree not that big a deal. However, if he may have taken an original - of which no copy existed then that's a different story.

Whats the difference if its a copy or not? If it contains vital U.S. secrets, you think the people who could receive that info would care if its a Xerox or if its the original? So, according to you, it would be OK for someone to make COPIES of top secret documents?

 

[heartsurgeon]

I believe we should give Mr. Burgler the benefit of the doubt...OH MY, i meant to say Mr. Berger...i apologize for the slip up.

I also don't believe that the fact that Sandy Berger once was a lawyer-lobbyist representing firms owned by the Communist Chinese military should have any bearing on his truthfullness.

I also condemm those who would revisit the fact that Sandy Berger's "e-mails" in the clinton White House when he was NS advisor to Clinton, were misteriously "lost" due toa computer "glitch"

I'm also sure that Mr. Berger's opposition to a law proposed in 2000, that would have made "leaking" classified documents a felony, was strictly based in his desire to preserve the Consitution.

In summary, i believe it is extremely low for anyone to suggest that Mr. Berger inadvertantly removing 50-90 documents from a secure archive room, including all drafts of the "Millenium" after action report (written by Richard Clarke, providing a critique of U.S. security at that time), over multiple trips to the archive, including handwritten notes, observed to be stuffed into his socks by archive personnel...is some sort of big deal.

It was only sex....errr....papers...
Everyone has misplaced or inadvertantly removed papers which are classified, from someone else's office...for heaven's sake it's just papers..

smells like another vast right wing conspiracy again....

those nasty Republican's......

And the fact that Mr. Berger was Sen. Kerry's "National Security Advisor" to his campaign, just proves how trustworthy Mr. Berger was. I'm shocked that anyone would believe that Mr. Berger did anything that was illegal. Shocked....

 

[conjur]

Going to spam all of these threads with the same drivel, hs?

 

[Train]

well if a story that broke in January 2004 is too old, well, then your saying the Bush Bashers in here dont/shouldnt bring up stuff about him prior to that?

seems like fair game to me

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Train
well if a story that broke in January 2004 is too old, well, then your saying the Bush Bashers in here dont/shouldnt bring up stuff about him prior to that?

seems like fair game to me

No, you are misinterpreting what we are saying.

We are saying if it wasn't a big enough story to leak last year, why is it now all of a sudden a big story to leak?

The timing of this is what is the key.

 

[Todd33]

Exactly, we are not defending his actions. Read the disclaimer.

It's all about timing and the skewing of the story. He cannot cover up something by taking copies (no one has claimed originals, in fact one claim was he took the same document twice on two different occasions). I would assume the national archive has everything in a database in a pdf like format, printed when requested. I guess if you take the stance that Berger is a liberal crook, then have fun with it. It's not relavent to many but the Hannity types. Twisting it into a conspiracy about Kerry and a Clinton cover up is not supported by any facts. By why do we need facts or logic, this is politics!

Also, the archive keeps full inventory of all documents, when checked in and out. Why would someone steal copies of inventoried docs? Like saying "catch me, please!". He seems more scatter brained than a criminal mastermind.

 

[nutxo]

He broke the law. Lock him up and move on.

 

[Thump553]

There are also tons of bogus rumors being floated by the GOP rumormongers, too-many of which are repeated in heartsurgeon's post above:

-that Berger was stuffing confidential documents in his socks

-that Berger stole all the copies of document X (usually something that would be a smoking gun against Clinton).

It appears Berger screwed up. That is a matter for the criminal courts. But the timing of this leak is clearly a bit of misdirection designed to deflect attention from the 9/11 report.

Ironically, Berger was a pretty conservative Democrat who supported much of what Bush has done in Iraq and respected by many non-radical Republicans. By next week, this will be a nonstory. The only lasting effect will be Berger will not be invited to be part of the Kerry administration.

One leak I like to see is who in the White House leaked the name of the diplomat's wife as a current CIA operative in order to get political retribution? That's a real story, not this political smoke screen.

 

[Bitek]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
...
I also condemm those who would revisit the fact that Sandy Berger's "e-mails" in the clinton White House when he was NS advisor to Clinton, were misteriously "lost" due toa computer "glitch"...

Now what was that that just happened to the microfiche containing The Honorable President Bush's courageous military record? What? The Pentagon accidentally destroyed the Commander-in-Chief's military records? Those same records that would have once and for all proved he really was a responsible and brave soldier dedicated to the service of his country and fellow military man? Those which would unquestionably set into record the actions of Americas bravest "War President" for the rest of the nations history? Oops....

 

[Gaard]

It's probably irrelevant, but the commission says that they have all of the documents that Cheney is alleged to have taken. That might not be worded correctly...they have all of the info that those documents had in them. Oh forget it, I can't remember his exact words. It was on Lou Dobbs a few hour ago...look it up.

 

[AndrewR]

Screw the timing already -- the key here is that documents of the highest security classification have been stolen and "misplaced" by a partisan figure looking to not only cover his ass but those of his former and current (now also former) bosses. He didn't take "copies" -- he took drafts with handwritten notes, notes which likely shed serious light on the importance with which the previous administration dealt with the terrorism issue. Further, the author of those memos was none other than Richie Clarke, who supposedly screamed to the hills about the menace of terrorism, which would therefore be reflected in his drafts regarding the very same subject.

Timing? Timing? What NATIONAL SECURITY and ACCOUNTABILITY? There are laws governing classified material, and they are fairly simple. You don't "inadvertently" remove classified material from the National Archives when you're studying classified material in a special area reserved for said material. Either Berger is a thief, or he's a forgetful incompetent with no regard for safeguarding national secrets. There's a National Security Advisor for you. :roll:

 

[smashp]

Originally posted by: AndrewR
Screw the timing already -- the key here is that documents of the highest security classification have been stolen and "misplaced" by a partisan figure looking to not only cover his ass but those of his former and current (now also former) bosses. He didn't take "copies" -- he took drafts with handwritten notes, notes which likely shed serious light on the importance with which the previous administration dealt with the terrorism issue. Further, the author of those memos was none other than Richie Clarke, who supposedly screamed to the hills about the menace of terrorism, which would therefore be reflected in his drafts regarding the very same subject.

Timing? Timing? What NATIONAL SECURITY and ACCOUNTABILITY? There are laws governing classified material, and they are fairly simple. You don't "inadvertently" remove classified material from the National Archives when you're studying classified material in a special area reserved for said material. Either Berger is a thief, or he's a forgetful incompetent with no regard for safeguarding national secrets. There's a National Security Advisor for you. :roll:

I like how you combined the smear of Sandy Berger and Richard Clark into one full flowing spew. Its a 2 for 1 sale.

 

[burnedout]

Originally posted by: conjur

The timing of this is what is the key.

<cue Black Sabbath>

From various wire reports:

- Ashcroft Warns of Attack (March): Senator John Kerry, the expected Democratic presidential candidate, said the timing of the announcement appeared intended in part to distract attention from Mr. Bush's sagging poll numbers and problems in Iraq. ...and...Two Kerry supporters questioned the timing of the administration's threat report, wondering in a conference call arranged by the campaign whether the latest announcement was politically motivated.

- Ashcroft Warns of Attack (July): Democrats have criticized a number of such warnings by the administration and questioned the timing of the latest televised news conference that provided no new specific intelligence about an attack on any specific site.

- Capture of Saddam Hussien: On Seattle radio yesterday, Rep. Jim McDermott questioned the timing of Saddam Hussein's capture, saying, "I'm sure they could have found him a long time ago if they wanted to."

- FBI investigation of Philadelphia City Hall: Democratic State Senator Vince Fumo questioned the timing of the investigation and Ashcroft's visit, saying "I don't know how often the Attorney General of the United States goes to visit attorney generals throughout the United States and if this is just a stop-by to check on the office to see how it is doing, that timing is not exactly appropriate either."

- U.S. Allegations Against Cuba: "We know that Cuba has been doing some research with respect to biological offensive weapons possibly, and so we think that it is appropriate for us to point out this kind of activity," Powell said.

But Carter questioned the timing of the allegations that came during his visit to Cuba.

- Report Released Showing the Administration Withheld Medicare Estimates: One staffer also questioned the timing, suggesting that the administration wanted to release it when the news media was focused on Sen. John Kerry?s (D-Mass.) decision to name Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) as his running mate.

- Swift Boat Veterans for Truth: Meehan and other Kerry aides questioned the timing of the group's emergence just as the Kerry campaign was launching a $25-million television ad campaign based on his Vietnam War record

</cue Black Sabbath>

<Dikembe Mutombo>HA....HA....HA....HA....HA....HA....HA....HA....AHHHH</Dikembe Mutombo>

 

[Turgon]

It's sad and pathetic that the democrats are concerned with the politics of the issue rather than the despicable act itself. This is a serious situation.

 

[Ldir]

Originally posted by: Turgon
It's sad and pathetic that the democrats are concerned with the politics of the issue rather than the despicable act itself. This is a serious situation.

Not as serious as blowing the cover of an undercover CIA operative, something you bleating BAA hypocrites dismissed as no big deal. All you were concerned with was the politics of the issue.


---------------------
Bush Apologists of America (BAA): pulling the wool over America's eyes since 1980

 

[Chris A]

Originally posted by: Turgon
It's sad and pathetic that the democrats are concerned with the politics of the issue rather than the despicable act itself. This is a serious situation.

Bing Bing Bing... Nail on the head... Could you imagine the outcry if it was Condi Rice that had done this???

 

[Todd33]

Iff you have no arguement on the topic, just spin it into another?. No one is aguring the legality of the issue. It's on on going investigation and he has not been charged yet. Let it finish, then argue. (or start a new thread on his innocence/guilt)

The point of the thread was why/how/when it was leaked and how the right in the media all had the same talking points, all either lies or misleading. The whole sock stuffing thing was good for talking points for idiot pundits, but has nothing to do with the truth. They claimed a cover up embarrasing info and a tie to Kerry's speeches. Anyone have any evidence to those points?

 

[Chris A]

Originally posted by: Todd33
Iff you have no arguement on the topic, just spin it into another?. No one is aguring the legality of the issue. It's on on going investigation and he has not been charged yet. Let it finish, then argue. (or start a new thread on his innocence/guilt)

The point of the thread was why/how/when it was leaked and how the right in the media all had the same talking points, all either lies or misleading. The whole sock stuffing thing was good for talking points for idiot pundits, but has nothing to do with the truth. They claimed a cover up embarrasing info and a tie to Kerry's speeches. Anyone have any evidence to those points?

Who was covering this up for the last 8 months. When it all came out he admitted to the CRIME

 

[irwincur]

Who cares about the timing. Do you think the timing of Clark's book and the one month delay of the 911 Commission was suspect? How about the timing of the two other books that happened to be released at the same time as the people testifying - all because of 911 Commission delays and bumps on the publishing schedules? How about the timing of the 911 Commission itself - is the best time to reveal this information months before an election, or would it have been more wise to wait until after the election?

Quit spinning the story with the lame counter argument or 'the timing is odd'. Does not matter, the act happened, and it is a felony. I don't care if this happend five years ago and came out the day before the election - there is still the crime to be discussed. Crying about the timing is simply an attempt to push this away long enough for it to fall off of the face of the planet. Maybe Berger should have considered the consequences to himself and possibly his party (and his boss Billy) when he was making love to the documents (that implicate him in the eight years Clinton spent avoiding Al Queda) that he stuffed down his pant.

THE F-ING FACT IS THAT HE TOOK CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS AND EVEN 'LOST' SOME. THIS IS A MAJOR CRIME, REGARDLESS OF THE F-ING TIMING OF THE RELEASE. Did you also ever take a moment to consider that most FBI investigations are not public until they are near a decision on penalties and they are discussing the issue with the Justice Department. On matters of National security I would not doubt the FBI keeping hush hush on this. In my opinion, this is one slip up too many, Berger should be hanged, and his boss Bill who sent him belongs in prison with his brother.

 

[Chris A]

Originally posted by: irwincur
Who cares about the timing. Do you think the timing of Clark's book and the one month delay of the 911 Commission was suspect? How about the timing of the two other books that happened to be released at the same time as the people testifying - all because of 911 Commission delays and bumps on the publishing schedules? How about the timing of the 911 Commission itself - is the best time to reveal this information months before an election, or would it have been more wise to wait until after the election?

Quit spinning the story with the lame counter argument or 'the timing is odd'. Does not matter, the act happened, and it is a felony. I don't care if this happend five years ago and came out the day before the election - there is still the crime to be discussed. Crying about the timing is simply an attempt to push this away long enough for it to fall off of the face of the planet. Maybe Berger should have considered the consequences to himself and possibly his party (and his boss Billy) when he was making love to the documents (that implicate him in the eight years Clinton spent avoiding Al Queda) that he stuffed down his pant.

THE F-ING FACT IS THAT HE TOOK CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS AND EVEN 'LOST' SOME. THIS IS A MAJOR CRIME, REGARDLESS OF THE F-ING TIMING OF THE RELEASE. Did you also ever take a moment to consider that most FBI investigations are not public until they are near a decision on penalties and they are discussing the issue with the Justice Department. On matters of National security I would not doubt the FBI keeping hush hush on this. In my opinion, this is one slip up too many, Berger should be hanged, and his boss Bill who sent him belongs in prison with his brother.

I bet they wont even read through your reply. There will soon be a attempt at slaming you over your reply... His topic is straight out of the Democratic handbook of deception...

 

[Todd33]

Who was covering this up for the last 8 months. When it all came out he admitted to the CRIME

LOL. Maybe you should stop watching Fox. He's been cooperating with the investigation for 8 months. It was leaked and made public just this week. I guess some can't get off the "socks" crap and dig deeper.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Chris A

Originally posted by: Turgon
It's sad and pathetic that the democrats are concerned with the politics of the issue rather than the despicable act itself. This is a serious situation.

Bing Bing Bing... Nail on the head... Could you imagine the outcry if it was Condi Rice that had done this???

I guess you're ignoring the outcry over the following scandals and investigations against members of the Bush administration, including Bush himself:

Medicare cost coverup
Energy Task Force/Enron
Abu Ghraib/Torture Memo
Illegal Campaign Contributions for Texas Redistricting
Halliburton bribes
CIA operative leak