Posted on 04/01/2005 1:24:22 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Edited on 04/01/2005 2:36:26 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
WASHINGTON, March 31 - Samuel R. Berger, a national security adviser to President Bill Clinton, has agreed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge and give up his security clearance for three years for removing classified material from a government archive, the Justice Department and associates of Mr. Berger's said Thursday.
A respected figure in foreign policy circles for years, Mr. Berger has also agreed to pay a $10,000 fine as part of an agreement reached recently with the Justice Department after months of quiet negotiations, the associates said.
He is expected to enter his plea on Friday in United States District Court here, capping an embarrassing episode that reverberated in last year's presidential campaign.
Mr. Berger was a senior policy adviser to Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts, the Democratic presidential nominee, and was often mentioned as a possible secretary of state in a Kerry presidency. But he quit the campaign abruptly in July after accusations surfaced that he had inappropriately removed classified material from a secure reading room at the National Archives.
The material involved a classified assessment of terrorist threats in 2000, which Mr. Berger was reviewing in his role as the Clinton administration's point man in providing material to the independent commission investigating the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Officials with the Archives and the Sept. 11 commission ultimately determined that despite the incident, the commission had access to all the material needed in its work.
When the issue surfaced last year, Mr. Berger insisted that he had removed the classified material inadvertently. But in the plea agreement reached with prosecutors, he is expected to admit that he intentionally removed copies of five classified documents, destroyed three and misled staff members at the National Archives when confronted about it, according to an associate of Mr. Berger's who is involved in his defense but who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the plea has not been formalized in court.
The Justice Department, without discussing details, acknowledged that Mr. Berger had said he would plead guilty to a misdemeanor count for the unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents.
Mr. Berger, 59, was unavailable for comment Thursday. In a statement, his lawyer, Lanny Breuer, said that Mr. Berger "has cooperated fully with the Department of Justice and is pleased that a resolution appears very near."
"He accepts complete responsibility for his actions, and regrets the mistakes he made during his review of documents at the National Archives," Mr. Breuer said, adding that Mr. Berger "looks forward to putting this episode behind him very soon and continuing his career of public and private service to this country."
It is unclear what impact the case will have on Mr. Berger's future in government. While the plea agreement requires him to give up his secret security clearance for three years, it allows him to have it reviewed and restored within that time if the government asks him to serve on a panel or in another position with access to secret material, associates said. But some political analysts said the case against him, which Republican leaders seized on last year in accusing him of imperiling national security, may have made him unemployable in government in the short term. He is currently chairman of a global business strategy firm.
The charge carries a maximum sentence of a year in jail, but the plea agreement, which must be approved by a judge, does not call for jail time.
The criminal charge stems from Mr. Berger's removal of documents from the National Archives on two occasions during his review of material for the Sept. 11 commission.
On Sept. 2, 2003, in a daylong review of documents, Mr. Berger took a copy of a lengthy White House "after-action" report that he had commissioned to assess the government's performance in responding to the so-called millennium terrorist threat before New Year's 2000, and he placed the document in his pocket, the associate said. A month later, in another Archives session, he removed four copies of other versions of the report, the associate said.
Mr. Berger's intent, the associate said, was to compare the different versions of the 2000 report side by side and trace changes.
"He was just too tired and wasn't able to focus enough, and he felt like he needed to look at the documents in his home or his office to line them up," the associate said. "He now admits that was a real mistake."
Mr. Berger admits to compounding the mistake after removing the second set of documents on Oct. 2, 2003, the associate said. In comparing the versions at his office later that day, he realized that several were essentially the same, and he cut three copies into small pieces, the associate said. He also admitted to improperly removing handwritten notes he had taken at the Archives, the associate said.
Two days later, staff members at the Archives confronted Mr. Berger, and he now admits to misleading the Archives about what had happened. He indicated that the removal was inadvertent, and though he returned the two remaining copies of the report, he said nothing about the three he had destroyed, the associate said.
I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
This is a travishamocory. (What's really crazy is that FR spell checker says that word is okay.)
Calling Judge Greer, calling Judge Greer. Please exercise the remove the feeding tube option.
A liar though not as good as Michael Schiavo.
LOL!
bttt
An open invitation for ex-Clinton administration criminals to harm the nation in any manner they please, whenever they desire. I think I'm beginning to see the major Bush administration weakness--the fear that their enemies on the left will accuse them of playing politics.
Imagine shortly after Imperial Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor, some high ranking US government official steals sensitive documents that pertain to an investigation of that attack and is caught in the act. That individual would probably have faced capital punishment as a spy or saboteur.
He is a stupid, asskissing, lying bum. We all know it now
and it will forever hang from his toady neck.
A security clearance implies integrity.He should never be trusted again,never work in any official capacity, and all this should kick in after 20 years in prison.
He deserves the maximum penalty. There's no way someone with his national security background does this kind of thing by "mistake".
And just who is it that would want to restore his clearance?? This could/MUST be the subject of another unquiry. Course I realize a roomfull of PHDs won't understand at all. Gomer Pyle likely would. SHAZAM!
This sounds much more equitable than a small fine and temporary loss of his security clearance!
I just emailed the President, simply expressing My disgust over the likely outcome of this. It could be that a few more emails would indicate how seriously We take this matter.
He took one for the team. The people who he's protecting will hire him back into gov't in a heartbeat if we ever elect them again.
"a respected figure in foreign relations for years"
That is a crock! Yep, he got great creds under Clinton.
He arranged all the Chinese money for Clinton's campaign fund. He twiddled his thumbs over the Los Alamos nuclear secret mess, which was never solved. (Chinese, again.)
He approved when the rest of the gov't advised against sending all that rocketry computer hardware for a "test" with China, which "crashed", yet the Chinese were able to remove the secret hardware before the Americans were allowed on the crash site. (What F'ing crash? It was a give-away by Clinton for more funds.)
Berger is a traitor, by my estimation. I can't remember what's supposed to be on the documents he's pleading guilty to stealing, something "embarassing" to Clinton. Not a big deal, unless it's covering some of their traitorous activities. Hopefully, he's out for good after this one, although a misdemeanor doesn't create much baggage. His security clearance better be gone.
Do you remember Sen Jim Thompson's committee hearing on the Chinese money/Clinton campaign funding? Thompson had the goods, but Sen John Glenn, a Democrat, obstructed, protested, interrupted so much, and overpowered Thompson to the extent that the truth never came out. I believe Thompson would have been in line for president if he had been successful. Sorry to digress, but I can easily remember how mad I was.
I give up.
Hmmmmmmmmm........
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.