Posted on 01/10/2007 7:28:38 AM PST by PhiKapMom
WASHINGTON. Some classified documents that were unlawfully removed from the National Archives three years ago may never have reached their intended destination -- the Sept. 11 commission, a House Republican report concluded Tuesday.
The report contradicted Justice Department conclusions that the commission received all the necessary documents. The records were reviewed at the archives by the Clinton administration's national security adviser, Sandy Berger, who pleaded guilty in April 2005 to unlawfully removing several documents.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
No kidding.
It's taken them 2 years to come to this conclusion?
Investigative journalism is back! /s
This story is a gazillion more times scandalous than Watergate ever was.
You know what I would like to know ... who exactly in the DOJ made the plea deal with Berger
Well dah !!!!
I guess that means he was attempting to change history.
Mission accomplished.
Berger got off with a slap on the wrist. Now that more information is coming to light, is it possible to re-open the investigation, and who would be responsible for starting the process? Anyone know?
I didn't know the Keystone Kops were from Texas.
Well, you see, there was the scorpion-on-a-plane story, and James Brown is still unburied, and The Donald is still mad at Rosie, so there was just no room left to report the Burger story, darn it. Besides, it's so complex and messy that the average viewer/reader will just tune it out anyway. (Do I pass for a network executive?)
No, but I bet they reached the hands of the highest bidder.
The stolen 950+ FBI files AGAIN corrode justice, America, .... and history.
This is a very interesting story. Hope someone keeps it going.
"You know what I would like to know ... who exactly in the DOJ made the plea deal with Berger"
Good question. Read pages 41-50 of the report for the names of the DOJ officials involved. There are some interesting allegations on those pages about one DOJ official getting visibly agitated when pressed for info by the Archives IG about why he did not inform the 911 commission about the investigation into Berger! These pages are key in my mind to finding out why this matter has been dropped by DOJ.
The relevant names if anyone wants to chase down whether they worked for the Clinton DOJ are:
Noel Hillamn
John Dion
Bruce Swartz
Thomas Reilly
Bruce Swartz was 'sympathetic' to Berger according to the report, so we should start there if we want to pursue this. Hope this helps.
From Ashcroft's testimony:
The NSC's Millennium After Action Review declares that the United States barely missed major terrorist attacks in 1999 — 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. [My note: AD info?]
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.
It falls directly into the AD timeline. In that same post, I note that what Sandy Berger stole was the versions of the after action report:
The missing copies, according to Breuer and their author, Richard A. Clarke, the counterterrorism chief in the Clinton administration and early in President Bush's administration, were versions of after-action reports recommending changes following threats of terrorism as 1999 turned to 2000. Clarke said he prepared about two dozen ideas for countering terrorist threats. The recommendations were circulated among Cabinet agencies, and various versions of the memo contained additions and refinements, Clarke said last night.
Therefore, they were never provided to the Commission, as evidenced by the Commission Report footnotes (#769):
46. NSC email, Clarke to Kerrick,“Timeline,”Aug. 19, 1998; Samuel Berger interview (Jan. 14, 2004). We did not find documentation on the after-action review mentioned by Berger. On Vice Chairman Joseph Ralston’s mission in Pakistan, see William Cohen interview (Feb. 5, 2004). For speculation on tipping off the Taliban, see, e.g., Richard Clarke interview (Dec. 18, 2003).And to what does footnote (46) refer? On p. 117, Chapter 4, we find this:
Later on August 20, Navy vessels in the Arabian Sea fired their cruise missiles. Though most of them hit their intended targets, neither Bin Ladin nor any other terrorist leader was killed. Berger told us that an after-action review by Director Tenet concluded that the strikes had killed 20–30 people in the camps but probably missed Bin Ladin by a few hours. Since the missiles headed for Afghanistan had had to cross Pakistan, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs was sent to meet with Pakistan’s army chief of staff to assure him the missiles were not coming from India. Officials in Washington speculated that one or another Pakistani official might have sent a warning to the Taliban or Bin Ladin. (46)How about that? How many times have we heard Clinton say that he missed Bin Ladin by just a few hours? Yet the after-action report is missing, so the Commission relied on Sandy Berger's testimony.
Then the Clarke/Kerrick memo peaked my interest and I found this (#784):
Clarke was nervous about such a mission because he continued to fear that Bin Ladin might leave for someplace less accessible. He wrote Deputy National Security Advisor Donald Kerrick that one reliable source reported Bin Ladin's having met with Iraqi officials, who "may have offered him asylum." Other intelligence sources said that some Taliban leaders, though not Mullah Omar, had urged Bin Ladin to go to Iraq. If Bin Ladin actually moved to Iraq, wrote Clarke, his network would be at Saddam Hussein's service, and it would be "virtually impossible" to find him. Better to get Bin Ladin in Afghanistan, Clarke declared.There is also some speculation that Albright was the one who notified the Pakistanis about the raid, who then alerted Bin Laden. This is one reason why Berger and Albright were so upset about certain scenes in "The Path to 9/11".
Thanks for that info, penelopesire!!
I was going to read the report later when I had a free moment .. but I think I'm going to go read it now
The news of Berger's bungled burglary was "leaked" to the press after a year had already passed. His attorney was furious as he said that "Berger was cooperating".
PING to #13
Thanks for posting this. It's a winner.
Good post. It appears the corruption runs deep in the Bush Justice Department.
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.