Posted on 07/23/2004 4:45:06 AM PDT by angkor
Covering up? U.S. officials tell us that the FBI is focusing on a single document in its investigation of former White House National Security Adviser Samuel R. Berger. Investigators are trying to determine why Mr. Berger improperly removed a highly classified after-action report by Richard A. Clarke, an aide to Mr. Berger, that was harshly critical of the Clinton administration's response to the so-called millennium terrorist plot to bomb Los Angeles International Airport and other targets in late 1999.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
This may be the article Gertz was alluding to yesterday.
This is the article that Gertz was alluding to yesterday, although I think he probably has more interesting information to share with us in the future regarding the Berger matter.
U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies have used the millennium plot as an example of a counterterrorism success. But the Clarke memorandum is likely to portray a different picture.
Success? It was foiled by a single agent who acted on a hunch. Just good cop sense.
And was she awarded, decorated, or promoted for saving the lives of Americans? I don't think so.
Even Gertz is getting it wrong.
Bergler stole ALL FIVE of the draft versions of the report, according to Susan Schmidt of the Wash Post. He destroyed at least a few of them (it remains unclear whether he returned ANY to the Archives).
The question is whether the drafts (written by Richard Clarke) critiqued the Clinton WH regarding terrorism, then were edited to remove those criticisms from the final Millenium After Action Report.
By destroying all of the drafts, Bergler has effectively silenced the historical record. And Clarke will never have to explain his utter silence on Clinton WH failings in his inflammatory public testimony last spring.
Declassifying the final Millenium After Action Report serves little purpose with regard to the Berger matter.
Berger stole the drafts, not the final report.
It's logical that he did this to erase from history any negative comments found in the draft copies of the report (which was written by Richard Clarke).
Bergler was Clarke's immediate boss. I wonder what Bergler said to him after all of those damning draft copies had gone through the shredder.
Watergate II - coming to a nation's capital near you!
It seems to me that if you have an urge to stuff a top secret document in your pants, you should seek help.
Regardless of how the attack was thwarted, the point is that the Clinton administration did nothing in response. An attack is an attack whether it is successful or not. This non-response was in keeping with the Clinton MO. He essentially did nothing after the East Africa Embassies' bombings, which killed more than 200 people and injured 5,000, which rivals the the total number of casualties of 9/11.
Clinton could not risk being found out and order Berger to steal what he did. This will lead to cash to Clinton. There is almost no other reason that makes sense. Clinton could have stopped the murder of 3000 folks in NYC and did nothing except take cash to look the other way.
Occasionally, I order something from the Library of Congress. They obtain the "True Original" from the Archives, make my copies and return the "True Original" to the Archives. These are rare, "One Original Only" documents.
It is my opinion that various sites may have been pilfered and Berger is not the only fish.
Read Ashcroft's Testimony. It's the biggest clue.
The bottom line is Clinton doesn't give a damn about anyone except himself. Now that he knows, thanks to his book, that his legacy is Monica, he cares even less. People like Suzie, who would go to jail, rather than "tell the truth", are proof of the stupidity of loyalists.
I can understand Bergler wanting to protect himself and taking a fall to protect Clinton, but I can't understand Bergler taking a fall for Clarke.
Only thing that makes sense to me is that Bergler and/or Clinton's handwritten notes/memos, etc. either changed or muted Clark's report so as to leave out crucial portions or put in stuff that wasn't entirely true to mute its criticism.
The editing would have been in those drafts and would have revealed that Bergler and Clinton had been lying.
Clinton and his cronies are portraying Bergler as a bumbling "Inspector Clousseau" sort, but I don't believe it for a moment--when has Clinton ever been truthful about anything. Bergler, like Clinton, probably has the memory of an elephant. He remembered EXACTLY what was in those drafts and knew the evidence had to be destroyed at any cost.
The Inspector Clousseau persona was cooked up by Clinton for public consumption (not for the DOJ). If Bergler was really an Inspector Clousseau, first of all, he would never have advanced to the levels he achieved, or we would have heard about this long before now.
That goes without saying. But Clark was taking credit as the terrorism chief for the actions of a cop who was on the ball individually. Berger's document theft, according to this story, has something to do with Clark and his book, and his political back stabbing of the Bush Admin. during the 911 commission.
That also goes without saying. My point is that the big story is not who or how the Millennium plot was thwarted, but the fact that there was no reaction. Supposedly, Clark took Clinton to task for his inaction as part of the after action report. If Clinton had demonstrated any leadership, the US would have gone into Afghanistan after the Millennium attack. The justification was there along with the 1998 East Africa bombings of our embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, which claimed more than 5000 dead and injured. If that had been done, I doubt if there would have been a 9/11.
For the significance this development could have, I'm surprised there are so few responses to this post.
BUMP
Thanks, Peach! I think you are correct..
Officials said the investigation into the removal of the Clarke memorandum is expected to lead to the declassification and publication of the document. This could expose the duplicity of Mr. Clarke, who had little criticism of the Clinton administration in public.
Clarke is going to be exposed for the liar he is.
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.