Like former Presidents? Oh wait... This isn't about Clinton, it's about the whole Democrat machine. Timing of leak in Berger probe questioned Opinions on charges fall along party lines link to story By Bryan Bender and Patrick Healy, Globe Staff | July 21, 2004 WASHINGTON -- The revelation that Samuel R. Berger is under investigation for mishandling secret materials related to the 9/11 Commission investigation drew charges yesterday from top Republicans that the former national security adviser may have been trying to cover up Clinton administration failures in the fight against terrorism. Sept. 11 panel's report focuses on Clinton, Bush missteps. A16 But even as Berger was forced to quit his post as an adviser to presumptive Democratic presidential nominee John F. Kerry, Berger's allies rallied behind him, questioning whether the Bush administration leaked news of the 10-month-old probe to deflect attention just days before the commission is set to publish its findings from its inquiry into the suicide jet attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. ''The timing is very curious, given this has been underway now for this long," said Senate minority leader Tom Daschle, Democrat of South Dakota. ''Somebody leaked it, obviously, with an intent, I think, to do damage to Mr. Berger." For Republicans, Berger's actions raised questions about whether there was something more sinister at work. ''What could those documents have said that drove Mr. Berger to remove them without authorization from a secure reading room for classified documents," House Speaker Dennis Hastert said in a statement. ''Was this a bungled attempt to rewrite history and keep critical information from the 9/11 Commission and potentially put their report under a cloud?" Berger's handling of the documents -- stamped ''codeword," the highest classification -- first came into question in October 2003 after he spent a series of eight- to 10-hour sessions poring over Clinton-era documents in the National Archives. Berger was designated as the official from the Clinton administration to review documents relevant to 9/11 commission inquiries. He also was a witness at commission hearings and reviewed records to prepare for his personal testimony. One Berger confidant said the former national security adviser took home both his own written notes from the sessions as well as copies of three of the highly classified documents -- against both archive regulations and secrecy laws. Berger quickly returned two of the documents last fall when staff at the National Archives questioned him about missing documents, they said. A third document -- a review written by then-White House terrorism chief Richard Clarke of the Clinton White House's handling of terrorism threats around the time of the 2000 millennium celebrations -- remains unaccounted for. After a search of Berger's home earlier this year, the FBI could not locate it and Berger contends that he inadvertently destroyed it. The Berger confidant acknowledged that he knew he was violating archive procedures by taking home his written notes without prior approval, but denied allegations from unnamed government officials that he purposely stole the classified documents by hiding them in his clothing. Berger claims that the secret documents became intermingled with his notes and that he may have carried some of those notes in his pockets. But two of the three documents and the notes were quickly returned to the archives. GOP officials said the missing document raised questions about whether Berger was trying to keep information from the 9/11 commission. That was flatly denied by both Berger and one of the commission members, who called the charge ''ridiculous." ''None of our work is affected in any way," said the panel member, who spoke on condition of anonymity. ''We have many copies of it. He did not have access to anything that wasn't in duplicate. It can't have been to deprive us of information." Justice Department officials, meanwhile, declined to comment on the probe, only to say that it is still underway and no decision has been made on the whether to prosecute Berger. Until yesterday Berger had been an unpaid adviser to Kerry on foreign policy and national security issues, helping him formulate positions on the Iraq war, terrorism, weapons of mass destruction, and other central issues. ''Sandy Berger is my friend, and he has tirelessly served this nation with honor and distinction. I respect his decision to step aside as an adviser to the campaign until this matter is resolved objectively and fairly," Kerry said in a statement released yesterday. ---- Is there a pattern here? Machines run in patterns... SECURITY BREECHES Berger key figure in Chinagate Klayman: Kerry's choice as adviser shows can't be trusted Posted: July 21, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern link your bad self on over here Former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger – now the target of an FBI probe – was a key part of a deal the Clinton administration made to secure an illegal $300,000 contribution from the communist Chinese government, says an investigator into the Chinagate scandal in the 1990s. "Sandy Berger has misused sensitive information in the past," Larry Klayman, a U.S. Senate candidate from Florida and former Judicial Watch chairman, told WorldNetDaily. Klayman led the probe that triggered exposure of an illegal contribution made to Clinton through former Little Rock, Ark., restaurateur Charlie Trie. That deal corresponded with Berger's delivery of a written commitment to China that the U.S. government would not take any action to stop the escalating military actions by Beijing in its attempts to intimidate Taiwan. While Trie was handing over the cash to the president's legal defense fund, Klayman said, Berger "was delivering up a letter on White House stationery." But nothing ever came of the Chinagate investigation, led by Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., because the Democrats and Republicans swept it under the carpet, said Klayman. In exchange for allowing U.S. defense contractors to sell technology to China, Beijing poured millions of dollars into Clinton's election campaign. Clinton recieved funds from known or suspected Chinese intelligence agents, including Trie, James and Mochtar Riady of the Indonesian Lippo Group, John Huang and Maria Hsia. As detailed in Jack Cashill's explosive new book, "Ron Brown's Body," Clinton Commerce Secretary Ron Brown served as a front man in many of the deals. Brown died suddenly in a suspicious April 1996 plane crash just as an investigation got under way. Klayman contends Berger "was always in over his head" as national security adviser. "He was an international trade lawyer and not a national security expert," Klayman asserted. Berger stepped down yesterday as an adviser to Democratic Sen. John Kerry's presidential campaign. "That John Kerry would have someone like this as his adviser in security matters means that he cannot be trusted as president of the United States,"Klayman contended. Klayman says Kerry himself took money from Johnny Chung – a "serious error" for someone "trying to convince the country that he is worthy to be a leader in the fight against terrorism." Berger's involvement in the Kerry campaign also shows, Klayman said, that if he gets elected, "all the Clinton people are going to be infesting the White House." Klayman investigated numerous alleged abuses of both Bill and Hillary Clinton, including the "Filegate" scandal in which the Clinton White House illegally gathered confidential government files on key Republicans. He also has filed lawsuits against Bush adminstration figures, including Vice President Cheney, charging him with misleading investors in his previous role as CEO of Halliburton. ---- Before you flame this guy, he investigates BOTH sides.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert said in a statement. ''Was this a bungled attempt to rewrite history and keep critical information from the 9/11 Commission and potentially put their report under a cloud?" IRONY.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5463586/ Take a look at the end of this article. David Gergen, an advisor to Presidents Nixon, Reagan and Clinton, called the entire Berger affair "more innocent than it looks" and questioned the timing of the release of the story, since the investigation began in October 2003. Although Sandy Berger's behavior was wrong, and he should be admonished for what he did, the entire affair is looking like nothing more than an attempt by the Tom DeLay's of the world to shift the nation's focus away from the 9/11 commission report that comes out Thursday. I wonder why.
I was watching Scarborough Country last night, and it appears that what was missing are COPIES of documents. The 9/11 commission did have access to all the original documents and even used them in their reports. So the fact that they did have access to them and quoted them in the report shows that the Originals were taken. However, why the hell Was Berger taking out copies anyway? The rules are obviously that he shouldn't take out anything and he did. That makes it wrong. There are no two ways about it. Berger was wrong. But trying to trump this up as something bigger than it was is silly. And I do have to agree with Mark that this has been handled far better than the Felony committed by someone in the Bush White House. That person leaked highly classified information about an intel officer, while we have troops in the field fighting the war on terror. That person still has the same access, has not apologized, has not quit, and Bush himself did next to nothing to find out who it was. Both things done were wrong. One actually endangered our national security. But both were handled in two completely different ways. The difference is clear.
OK, just got back from AZ and haven't been following this, but... I once worked at the National Archives. There are strict procedures for viewing documents of any kind... you are only allowed to have one box open, one folder out of the box, and one document out of the folder at any time. You can't take notes on the clasified stuff. There's an Archivist in the room at all times. You get briefed on procedures before you even see the boxes. He screwed up big time and as of now, I'm not seeing a great reason for doing it. That said, a few points... he should have stepped down as Kerry's advisor when he first knew about the investigation because any imbecile could realize that this administration can't do it by the book and it was going to hit the news at some point, probably timed for maximum embarrasment. The investigation has been going on for months over an apparently simple set of facts... and yet it comes out now? Either the GOP timed it before the release of the 9-11 Report and the Dem Convention or a Dem decided to get it out of the way and off the table before the 9-11 Report and the Dem Convention to limit the damage and have a chance at quick recovery. If it ever comes out who leaked the info, it should make interesting reading regarding the assumptions involved in the cost/benefit analysis. Meanwhile, Los Alamos National Laboratory has been shut down for a few days with no end in sight because of security lapses. It's hard to play politics with LANL, because it really doesn't favor either party, but in terms of national security risks, that is the much more important story.
The thing about his is, the BS being said about Berger. Claiming he stuffed documents in his socks? What a joke. Then people say that he had documents that couldn't be used by the 9/11 commission, but the 9/11 commission(which is bi-partisan) has said they had everything they needed in the relm of documents, and quoted from those documents in their report. What Berger did was wrong, but the GOP lying about what happened, and what was missing is silly. It reminds me of when they lied about the 'Vandalism' done to the WHite House by the Clinton administration. Geez, just tell the truth.
Originally posted by rimrocker OK, just got back from AZ and haven't been following this, but... I once worked at the National Archives. There are strict procedures for viewing documents of any kind... you are only allowed to have one box open, one folder out of the box, and one document out of the folder at any time. You can't take notes on the clasified stuff. There's an Archivist in the room at all times. You get briefed on procedures before you even see the boxes. He screwed up big time and as of now, I'm not seeing a great reason for doing it. Thanks for the insight, and I agree: screwed-up and confusing as to why. That said, a few points... he should have stepped down as Kerry's advisor when he first knew about the investigation because any imbecile could realize that this administration can't do it by the book and it was going to hit the news at some point, probably timed for maximum embarrasment. Agreed ... Meanwhile, Los Alamos National Laboratory has been shut down for a few days with no end in sight because of security lapses. It's hard to play politics with LANL, because it really doesn't favor either party, but in terms of national security risks, that is the much more important story. Agreed
I am amused at how the Dems and the left-wing journos are changing the subject to the "timing" issue (see the NYT). Actually Berger himself could have chosen the time and place to announce that he was under investigation.
The 9/11 Commission knows that it doesn't have any use for documents it has not seen. How do they arrive at that conclusion? Have you all forgotten that Berger had his heat cut off? He was lining his clothes with paper so he could keep warm when he got home.
The commission quoted from the documents Berger supposedly took. The guy took only copies, and not originals. The 9/11 Commission had access to everything. What Berger did was wrong, possibly criminal, but he didn't take anything in order to keep the commission from getting ahold of it. He didn't stuff his sox with anything from the room.
WOW. According to Drudge, they are saying that there are documents that showed that Sandy Burglar nixed an attack on Osama Bin Laden!! If these were the documents that Sandy Burglar stole, then we have quite a scandal on our hands!
What you don't understand is that Berger didn't steal any documents. Berger took some copies of documents. The originals were never missing. Any information that was there is still there.
Are you certain? The original reports indicated that some were missing. ...The Archives is believed to have copies of some of the missing documents....
It's what DeDe Myers said on Scarborough Country the other day. It was her claim at least that intial reports and much of the subsequent reporting was not accurate. According to her it was a copy that was discovered missing. She said that the 9/11 commission had access to all the documents, and quoted them in their report proving that they were all available. She said the FBI spoke to Berger once several months ago, he answered their questions, they left and he never heard about it again until this stink flared up. I think Berger's explanation that it was a 'sloppy accident' is ludicrous, because it goes beyond sloppy. I guess with all the ludicrous accusations such as he was stuffing his socks with papers etc. I tend to believe Myers over a lof the reports. I mean if the 'witnesses' actually saw him stuffing these documents down his socks, and pants and stuff, why didn't they stop him, or contact the FBI at that time? It all seems dubious.
Shelby Target of Justice Probe Into 9/11 Leak Saturday, July 24, 2004 WASHINGTON — Sen. Richard Shelby (search) is the target of an ongoing Justice Department investigation into the leaking of the contents of classified phone intercepts received the day before the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, congressional sources told FOX News. Justice Department officials briefed members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (search) in closed session Thursday on Capitol Hill, naming the Alabama Republican as the target of the leak probe. Law enforcement and congressional sources said the purpose of the briefing was to notify Congress of the department's intent to refer information collected to the Senate Select Committee on Ethics (search) for review. Congressional sources told FOX News the ethics panel is now involved in the matter, though aides to the committee's bipartisan leaders, Republican Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio and Democratic Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, declined to comment. Virginia Davis, Shelby's spokeswoman, told FOX she had "no additional information" about the case. Davis declined to say whether Shelby's office had asked the Ethics Committee if it had received any information from Justice about the probe. Davis sent FOX a copy of a statement from Shelby that the senator issued in January: "My position on this issue is clear and well-known: At no time during my career as a United States senator and, more particularly, at no time during my service as chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence have I ever knowingly compromised classified information. To my knowledge, the same can be said about my staff. We have provided the investigation with our full cooperation in the past, and we will continue to do so." Shelby served on the intelligence panel for eight years. Currently, he is chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee (search). Law enforcement sources said the Justice Department investigation remains "open" but the decision to refer the information collected so far to the Ethics Committee suggests the FBI may not have enough evidence to bring charges and is now leaving the matter up to the Senate. The case involves the leaking of intercepted messages from Sept. 10, 2001. The National Security Agency intercepted the messages — "The match begins tomorrow" and "tomorrow is zero day" — suggesting an attack might occur the next day. The Arabic messages were not translated until Sept. 12. The contents of the messages were revealed in closed session of a House-Senate panel investigating the Sept. 11 attacks by Air Force Lt. Gen. Michael V. Hayden, then-director of the National Security Agency. http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,126904,00.html
Looks like the Republicans made the whole thing up. Again. http://users1.wsj.com/lmda/do/check...710778456,00.html?mod=politics%5Fprimary%5Fhs . . . Officials looking into the removal of classified documents from the National Archives by former Clinton National Security Adviser Samuel Berger say no original materials are missing and nothing Mr. Berger reviewed was withheld from the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks . . . Archives spokeswoman Susan Cooper said officials there "are confident that there aren't any original documents missing in relation to this case." She said in most cases, Mr. Berger was given photocopies to review, and that in any event officials have accounted for all originals to which he had access . . . .
But of course it won't be as big a story. The initial provocative stories get a lot more airtime then the truth.
