Archives Staff Was Suspicious of Berger

Washington Post ^ | July 22, 2004 | John F. Harris and Susan Schmidt

[Remember_Salamis]

Last Oct. 2, former Clinton national security adviser Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger stayed huddled over papers at the National Archives until 8 p.m.

What he did not know as he labored through that long Thursday was that the same Archives employees who were solicitously retrieving documents for him were also watching their important visitor with a suspicious eye.

After Berger's previous visit, in September, Archives officials believed documents were missing. This time, they specially coded the papers to more easily tell whether some went missing, said government officials and legal sources familiar with the case.

The notion of one of Washington's most respected foreign policy figures being subjected to treatment that had at least a faint odor of a sting operation is a strange one. But the peculiarities -- and conflicting versions of events and possible motives -- were just then beginning in a case that this week bucked Berger out of an esteemed position as a leader of the Democratic government-in-waiting that had assembled around presidential nominee John F. Kerry.

As his attorneys tell it, Berger had no idea in October that documents were missing from the Archives, or that archivists suspected him in the disappearance. It was not until two days later, on Saturday, Oct. 4, that he was contacted by Archives employees who said that they were concerned about missing files, from his September and October visits. This call -- in Berger's version of the chronology, which is disputed in essential respects by a government official with knowledge of the investigation -- was made with a tone of concern, but not accusation.

[rabidralph]

Anytime the Post can stick it to the NY Times, they work tirelessly to do so.

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

He didn't have a clue nor did he have time to take a briefing on a terrorist threat because he was too "busy."

God I hope the RNC is paying attention. Good campaigning material.

[mtbopfuyn]

How did we even survive the Clinton years?

Only because it took OBL a little longer to get his ducks in a row.

[angkor]

He had pulled a switcheroo.

Nah, he just stole all the draft copies with comments and revisions and destroyed them.

Susan Schmidt of the Wash Post has now written two stories asserting that Berger took ALL of the draft copies.

[Guenevere]

bttt

[angkor]

Is it the norm [for NARA] to call an attorney first when something is missing?

Bubba Clinton has formal statutory authority over the papers.

Lindsey - as Clinton's designated attorney in this matter - would have been the point man in obtaining the necessary waivers for Berger to examine the docs.

There was a formal procedure undertaken to allow Berger into the Archives, and it seems likely that Lindsey was the legal interface (between the Archives and Berger) in executing the paperwork, defining the scope of the review, the dates and times of review, etc.

I don't see any issue with Archives calling Lindsey first, he would have been the legal pointman from the Archive's point-of-view.

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

Thanks...that clears that issue up for me.

[eeriegeno]

Has Berger been arrested yet? No!

Has the DOJ issued an indictment yet? No!

How much time has elapsed since Berger is allegedly to have stolen classified materials? 9, nearly 10 months!

It is pathetic that the law has to be enforced by the media and congressional committees and not the DOJ as intended?

[MamaLucci]

I am thinking that someone's handwritten scrawl on one of the drafts might be very very worrisome to a certain party or parties right now...

Could that "someone" be Richard Clarke?

[Shut up and take it]

"Bigger than Watergate, imo."

I agree. It's time for the Republicans to take advantage of the "special prosecutor" law that the Democrats were good enough to establish. It'll be fun to listen to the Democrats whine like they did during the Clinton-Lewinsky sex scandal.

[Arrowhead1952]

Archives Staff Was Suspicious of Berger, and didn' say a F'ing thing.

[MindBender26]

>"The notion of one of Washington's most respected foreign policy figures being subjected to treatment that had at least a faint odor of a sting operation is a strange one."

No, it's not a sting, you liberal reporterette twit. It's not a 'sting." It's a THIEF GETTING CAUGHT!

A sting would be where some 5' 10" tall blond female Archives employee whispered "Pssst, Sandy Baby. Slick Willie would really like to see a copy of this...."

This was an out and out theft by a man who knew better. The only real question is, and the one the pest should be asking is: Why?

What was in those papers Burger wanted to destroy or take to someone else, and who was that someone else.

Clinton, probably not. He certainly would have access to all if those records himself. Kerry, same thing. Certainly Burger didn't just need the data for himself.

Who?

Ask yourself, "Who?" "Who" had enough money to get Burger to do this? "Who" wanted to know what was in those papers very badly?

Add this into the mix. Burger's lawyers are tried twice to get DOJ to accept a quick "I did it."

Why doesn't Burger want the "Why" question asked or answered.... and of course for us old newsie types "Why" quickly leads to "Who" for....

[mombonn]

He has acknowledged through attorneys that he knowingly did not show these papers to Archives officials for review before leaving -- a violation of Archives rules, but not one that he perceived as a serious security lapse.

If Condi had done this, Sandy would be screaming to the heavens about how it was a SERIOUS SECURITY LAPSE, and that she was well aware of the rules.

I hope he falls hard.

[agincourt1415]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1176256/posts

Link to Kerry Web Site: Pages appear to have dropped over the Berger Incident.

[conservative in nyc]

Weren't some of the "handwritten" comments Berger's own handwritten notes which he removed from the documents ..??

No doubt some were, But I suspect there were handwritten notes in the margin of the drafts saying things like "delete this".

[turbocat]

"I didn't have a clue" not only made Kerry look dumb, but it wasn't a flat-out "No."

You know, I sat there after hearing Kerry and thought long and hard about how it did not seem to be an "answer". Not a clue was his answer both times, but he never actually said "no".

[turbocat]

And .. it was Kerry's campaign which refused to attend intel briefings (they were too busy) .. saying they had their own intelligence. Was that intel the stuff Berger was pilfering from the Archives ..??

oooooo, that sound very interesting.

[Nataku X]

It's all about the timing! It's obviously political! Oh, yeah, and the timings of Moore's movie and the 911 comission report release were entirely coincidential--shame on you for suggesting Moore or the 911 comission have any political motives in their blemishless hearts.

[Mo1]

The thing that needs to be known is who were the five????

Well that info will come out sooner or later

[snooker]

"Is this really PAGE ONE???"

Not on the on line print image.