Posted on 07/19/2004 5:07:42 PM PDT by Sub-Driver
AP: Clinton Adviser Probed in Terror Memos
3 minutes ago Add U.S. National - AP to My Yahoo!
By JOHN SOLOMON
WASHINGTON - President Clinton (news - web sites)'s national security adviser, Sandy Berger, is the focus of a criminal investigation after admitting he removed highly classified terrorism documents from a secure reading room during preparations for the Sept. 11 commission hearings, The Associated Press has learned.
Berger's home and office were searched earlier this year by FBI (news - web sites) agents armed with warrants. Some drafts of a sensitive after-action report on the Clinton administration's handling of al-Qaida terror threats during the December 1999 millennium celebration are still missing.
Berger and his lawyer said Monday night he knowingly removed handwritten notes he had taken from classified anti-terror documents he reviewed at the National Archives by sticking them in his jacket and pants. He also inadvertently took copies of actual classified documents in a leather portfolio, they said.
"I deeply regret the sloppiness involved, but I had no intention of withholding documents from the commission, and to the contrary, to my knowledge, every document requested by the commission from the Clinton administration was produced," Berger said in a statement to the AP.
Berger served as Clinton's national security adviser for all of the president's second term and most recently has been informally advising Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (news - web sites). Clinton asked Berger last year to review and select the administration documents that would be turned over to the commission.
The FBI searched Berger's home and office with warrants earlier this year after employees of the National Archives told agents they believed they witnessed Berger put documents into his clothing while reviewing sensitive Clinton administration papers, officials said.
When asked, Berger said he returned some of the classified documents, which he found in his office, and all of the handwritten notes he had taken from the secure room, but said he could not locate two or three copies of the highly classified millennium terror report.
(Excerpt) Read more at story.news.yahoo.com ...
I agree. This will have the shelf-life of the "Joe Clarke Turns Out to be a Liar" story.
The propaganda wing of the Democratic party, aka the mainstream media, will have no doubts about how to handle this.
Truth be told I've been wearing a smile like the Cheshire Cat in Alice in Wonderland ever since this story broke.
That's a good point. Proactive rather than reactive. Rush has the contacts, that's for sure.
Not yet, she is now 19 weeks... You should see the sonograms
"I had no intention of withholding documents from the commission..."
Just a common, absent-minded mistake. Sounds reasonable to me. Nothing to see here. Let's MoveOn.
But IN HIS PANTS!? I mean, come on. Even if you are going to admit that you "accidentally" lifted this critical governent evidence, would you tell them you did it by stuffing 'em in your pants!? That's supposed to sound credible? Are these guys just a bunch of morons?
Do you think that Gorelick might have given them the heads-up on these Millenium documents, which then promoted Clinton to send Berger to the Archives.
Because one of the archivists knows him and was probably looking for advice. An archivist going to your house?? When hell freezes over unless it would cost them their job.
I was surprised that Berger said he "knowingly" took the handwritten documents. Why admit that? And as national security advisor, he knew better.
BTW, look at what newsmax resurrected:
The case of the pilfered Clinton terror files isn't the first time Sandy Berger has had to do some fancy rhetorical footwork to explain away the obvious.
In Sept. 2002, he flatly denied during sworn Congressional testimony that the government of Sudan had ever offered to turn over Osama bin Laden to his boss, Bill Clinton.
While Congress didn't press him on the details, Berger had a tougher time a few months later during an interview with WABC Radio's Steve Malzberg, who grilled him on Clinton's Feb. 2002 admission that the Sudanese offer was indeed real. "I've seen [Clinton's] quote," he told Malzberg. "And I think at the time there was some examination of whether or not he could be held here if, in fact, we had an opportunity to get him. And the judgment was that we didn't have any basis to hold him here at that time."
But Berger insisted the Clinton administration's conclusion that it couldn't detain bin Laden "was not pursuant to an offer by the Sudanese. "
"The Sudanese never offered to give him to the United States," he insisted. "This is something I've gone back to check very carefully on. No one knows of any such offer." When asked why the Clinton administration didn't press Sudan to release bin Laden to the U.S. after Saudi Arabia rejected a plan to have him sent there, Berger grew defensive.
"The Sudanese . . . had no intention of turning bin Laden over to someone who would have been hostile, period," he insisted. What about Clinton's admission to the contrary? No doubt it was just another case of what Berger might call "sloppiness
If you read the article carefully, it seems the Archives staff caught Berger red-handed (he "misplaced" a document they gave him), and so they then gave him "marked" copies (read "traceable") which he promptly stuck in his pants, coat and briefcase before he waddled out...
Sounds like he was either 1) desperate; or 2) confident that he wouldn't face any real consequences. If recent history is any guide (lost e-mails, Whitewater and FBI files, classified CIA docs on the director's home computer, etc., ad nauseum), I'd say it was a safe gamble.
Man, I've got to go to bed.
Clinton was interviewed by the "war slut" a week or so ago and when confronted with that confession Clinton gave to the Long Island Association in February 2002 said he must have "mispoken".
So they can do stuff accidentally and mispeak, but every time Bush does anything they don't like it's a lie.
Just an aside (perhaps), but Roger Clinton's visit to North Korea has always been high on my list of "I want the REAL story on what he was doing over there". I see it is on your list of doings in December 1999.
Ya know(to quote hillary),they should have spent more time shredding docs instead of stealing White House treasures and furniture.
That's true. I believe this will get even less print coverage than the UN oil for food scandal, which has received, to date in my area, zero coverage.
Girlymangate is definately the story of the week.
Berger was with Edwards until Kerry won the biggest part of the primaries, which was AFTER his house was searched; so, either Berger didn't tell Kerry what was going on, or Kerry has known this all along.
I haven't seen Lindsey's name in a while, but may have must missed it. He does seem to be that administration's go to buy when there's trouble.
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a36fe7f421ae8.htm
Berger was "chief Lobbist for Ch-Coms??
Ron Brown was the bagman for the ChiCom stuff too.
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.