Archive for the ‘Sandy Berger’ Category

Hillary Rodham Clinton’s A Team

February 1, 2008

Jay Tea lists some key Clinton team members:

Former federal judge Alcee Hastings, impeached for corruption and removed from office back in 1989.

Bill Clinton: Impeached for perjury, acquitted by the Senate, but stripped of his license to practice law for lying under oath.

Sandy Berger: Pleaded guilty to stealing and destroying 9/11-related documents from the National Archives; has yet to undergo the agreed-upon polygraph test over the matter.

Norman Hsu: Wanted fugitive for fraud from the 90s, sneaked back into the US and became a major fundraiser for Hillary until his fugitive status was uncovered.

Sidney Blumenthal: Faciing trial for aggravated drunken driving in Nashua, New Hampshire the night of the New Hampshire primary.

This is what you can expect of a possible HRC White House Staff. The continuing of their Culture of Corruption.

Compare and contrast

October 26, 2007

Rob at Say Anything points out:

What amazes me is that nobody in the media seems willing to report on the fact that CIA Agent Valerie Plame, in a fit of nepotism, sent her own husband on a mission to Niger with the distinctly partisan agenda of seeking to undermine his foreign policy. A trip that her husband then subsequently misrepresented to fit said agenda in a report to the New York Times.

What amazes me is that there are people who really do think Libby committed “treason” (despite the fact that it was known from the start that a State Department official blabbed first), yet know nothing about Sandy Berger’s theft and destruction of classified documents associated with the Clinton Administration and their lackluster response to terrorist attacks.

Sandy Berger on the Clinton team again…

October 8, 2007

Sandy Berger, who stole highly classified terrorism documents from the National Archives, destroyed them and lied to investigators, is now an adviser to presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Berger has admitted stealing documents from the National Archives in advance of the 9/11 Commission hearings in 2003. The documents, written by White House counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke, were a “tough review” of the Clinton administration’s shortcomings in dealing with terrorism, Clarke’s lawyer told the Washington Post.

On several occasions, Berger stuffed highly classified documents into his pants and socks before spiriting them out of the Archives building in Washington, according to investigators. On one occasion, upon reaching the street, he hid documents under a construction trailer after checking the windows of the Archives and Justice Department buildings to make sure he was not being watched.

Berger came back later and retrieved the documents, taking them home and cutting them up with scissors. Two days later, he was informed by Archive employees that his removal of documents had been detected.

Good summary of the Plame spin…

March 18, 2007

The Overt agent of the CIA, Valerie Plame gave her spin to congress and Doug has a excellent summary:

Sounds like there were a few problems with Plame‘s testimony.

Was the disclosure of Plame‘s identity a wanton, stupid act? Certainly. Was it a crime? Apparently not, if prosecutor Fitzgerald’s investigation and Toensing’s testimony mean anything.

But let’s stop and compare this media firestorm with one that fizzled. Former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger admitted to the theft and destruction of Top Secret documents. He committed these real crimes just prior to their discovery by the 9/11 Commission’s investigation. Has there been any interest expressed in the theft and destruction of material directly related to the greatest terrorist attack in history? No. The mainstream media doesn’t appear to care a whit.

And the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy™ says the media is partisan.

Update: There is a lot more good stuff at Flopping Aces & at Hillary Needs Vacation
Christopher Hitchen has something to add as well.

Rewriting History

March 13, 2007

Not just a good book, but Michael Barone points out that Bill Clinton may have gotten away with it with help from Sandy Berger:

What he admitted to doing, after first denying it, is extraordinary. On multiple occasions he removed documents from the room where he was reading them, concealed them in his pants and socks, hid them at a construction site outside the building, took them home, and, in some cases, destroyed them.

Some of these documents may have been unique and may have contained handwritten comments that could have looked bad in light of what happened on September 11. I have known Berger more than 30 years and find it unlikely that he would have done something like this on his own.

Did Bill Clinton ask him to destroy documents that would make him look bad in history? I get a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach when I ask that question. But this or something very much like it seems to be the only explanation that makes sense. The Berger case was prosecuted by career staff in the Department of Justice, with little publicity. In 2005 Berger was fined $50,000 — not a ruinous sum for one of his earning capacity — ordered to perform 100 hours of community service, and had his security clearance lifted for three years, which means he could come back in a new administration after the 2008 election. The attempt to write, or un-write, history — if it was that — evidently succeeded.

HT to Lorie Byrd

Are those top secret documents in your pants…

December 21, 2006

…or is Sandy Berger a crook? The obvious answer is both are true.

A leading authority on classification policy, Steven Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists, said Mr. Berger’s behavior was reminiscent of a “dead drop,” when spies leave records in a park or under a mailbox to be retrieved by a handler.

“It seems deliberate and calculated,” Mr. Aftergood said. “It’s impossible to maintain the pretense that this was an act of absentmindedness.” . . . At that time, Mr. Berger insisted that he accidentally removed and destroyed the records. When he pleaded guilty last year, the former national security chief admitted he acted intentionally.

HT to Mr. Reynolds., who has more by way of My Way News.

The report said that when Archives employees first suspected that Berger – who had been President Clinton’s national security adviser – was removing classified documents from the Archives in the fall of 2003, they failed to notify any law enforcement agency.

Berger, who pleaded guilty to unlawfully removing and retaining classified documents, was fined $50,000, ordered to perform 100 hours of community service and was barred from access to classified material for three years.

The report said that when Berger was reviewing the classified documents in the Archives building a few blocks from the Capitol, employees saw him bending down and fiddling with something white, which could have been paper, around his ankle.

However, Archives employees did not feel at the time there was enough information to confront someone of Berger’s stature, the report said.

Brachfeld reported that on one visit, Berger took a break to go outside without an escort.

“In total, during this visit, he removed four documents … .

“Mr. Berger said he placed the documents under a trailer in an accessible construction area outside Archives 1 (the main Archives building).”

Berger acknowledged that he later retrieved the documents from the construction area and returned with them to his office.

9/11 film review…

August 28, 2006

Govindini Murty reviews the movie The Path to 9/11, that will air on ABC (not to be confused with the movie currently in theaters).

The writing, acting, directing, editing, cinematography, and overall story-telling are first-rate. “The Path to 9/11” is fast-paced and thoroughly gripping the entire way. The five-hour miniseries (aired over two nights) is based on the 9/11 Commission report, and also on ABC News correspondent John Miller’s book, “The Cell.”

This is the first Hollywood production I’ve seen that honestly depicts how the Clinton administration repeatedly bungled the capture of Osama Bin Laden. One astonishing sequence in “The Path to 9/11” shows the CIA and the Northern Alliance surrounding Bin Laden’s house in Afghanistan. They’re on the verge of capturing Bin Laden, but they need final approval from the Clinton administration in order to go ahead. They phone Clinton, but he and his senior staff refuse to give authorization for the capture of Bin Laden, for fear of political fall-out if the mission should go wrong and civilians are harmed. National Security Adviser Sandy Berger in essence tells the team in Afghanistan that if they want to capture Bin Laden, they’ll have to go ahead and do it on their own without any official authorization. That way, their necks will be on the line – and not his. The astonished CIA agent on the ground in Afghanistan repeatedly asks Berger if this is really what the administration wants. Berger refuses to answer, and then finally just hangs up on the agent. The CIA team and the Northern Alliance, just a few feet from capturing Bin Laden, have to abandon the entire mission.

HT to Ace.

Let’s look at some history…

November 30, 2005

Grayhawk takes a look at what happened and what was said by whom in 1998.
Some hightlights:

January 14, 1998: Iraq continues to block the work of the inspection team. The President of the Security Council issues a statement terming Iraq’s actions unacceptable and a clear violation of the relevant resolutions and reiterates its demand that Iraq cooperate fully and immediately without conditions (S/PRST/1998/1).

February 1, 1998: “We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction.” – US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright

Early February, 1998: Two technical evaluation meetings (TEMS) take place in Baghdad, reviewing 1998 the position with respect to the chemical weapons agent VX. and missile warheads. The report of the outcome of the meetings is submitted to the Council (document S/1998/176). Despite Iraq’s assertions and it having had a full opportunity to present its views on all matters pertaining to the two issues, the team of UNSCOM international experts conclude unanimously that Iraq has still not provided sufficient information for UNSCOM to conclude that Iraq had undertaken all the disarmament steps required of it in these areas. The Commission’s experts provide the Council with an oral briefing of the outcome on these two TEMS in March 1998.

February 4, 1998: “One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.” – President Bill Clinton.

February 17, 1998: “If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.” – President Bill Clinton

February 18, 1998: “Iraq is a long way from Ohio, but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face. And it is a threat against which we must, and will, stand firm.” – Secretary of State US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright

February 18, 1998: “He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.” – Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser.

April 8, 1998: The report of the biological weapons TEM is transmitted to the Council (S/1998/308). As with the other TEMs, the experts unanimously conclude that Iraq’s declaration on its biological weapons programme is incomplete and inadequate. (BBC: A UN report claims Iraq is continuing to hold back information about its germ warfare programme)

June 24, 1998 : Richard Butler confirms reports that traces of the nerve gas VX has been found in Iraqi missile fragments. Iraq had always insisted it had not weaponised VX. Iraq dismisses the charges, warning of “grave consequences” if sanctions are not lifted.

October 27, 1998 – Richard Butler says tests carried out by international scientists confirm that Iraq filled missile warheads with the deadly nerve agent VX before the 1991 Gulf War.

October 31, 1998: President Clinton signs the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998:

November 10, 1999: “Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.” – US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright

There is much, much more. Stop by and read the whole thing.

Baldilocks points out the "level of contempt that the network has for the American public."

October 10, 2005

She posts the following on target observation:

Let me get this straight: Clinton-appointed FBI Director Louis Freeh goes on CBSNews “60 Minutes” to accuse the former president of a) promising, but failing to pursue the perpetrators of the 1996 Khobar Towers terror attack in Saudi Arabia—in which 19 members of the US military died without being able to raise a weapon, and b) soliciting a donation for his future presidential library from then-Crown Prince Abdullah of S.A. as quid pro quo for not pursuing the investigation–and CBS goes to Sandy Berger to rebut the charges?

When the convicted burglar of classified material is set forth on a long-running television network news program as the voice of integrity, you know the level of contempt that the network has for the American public. Along with Mary Mapes’ and Dan Rather’s dogged insistence on the veracity of information contained in patently forged documents, asking Sandy Berger for confirmation of anything more complicated than whether rain is wet or not is a sign of how ignorant CBS believes the average citizen is.

The frightening part about this is that CBS may be correct.

That old double standard

July 15, 2005

As Baldilocks points out, no matter how much the dems pound the table over the so-called Plamegate non-scandal, no law was broken by Karl Rove.

You can’t break a law by outing a person as a covert agent when they do not meet the standards of that very same law which defines the term ‘covert agent.’

James Taranto points out that Joe Wilson’s own book states that he and his wife had lived in the US for over 5 years prior to his trip to Niger that his wife (not VP Cheney) set up for him.

She then goes on to ask why this clear violation of federal law has gone unpunished:

Meanwhile Sandy Berger, he of the pants stuffed with classified documents, still has not been sentenced.

Asked why Berger wasn’t sentenced as scheduled [for stealing and destroying top secret terrorism documents from the National Archives, to which he plead guilty] on Friday, July 8, a Justice Department spokesman told NewsMax on Tuesday that Berger’s sentencing has been postponed till September.

Um, JD spokesman, that doesn’t answer the question ‘why.’

Update: Mr. Reynolds has a roundup including Jerry Pournelle putting in his two centicredits.

More from Mr. Pournelle:

“[M]ost of the Democrats who want to beat up the administration over the war voted to authorize it, so an honest analysis of the war decision factors won’t work. So, we have this imbecile investigation taking up time.”

and Mark Steyn:

“But in the real world there’s only one scandal in this whole wretched business — that the CIA, as part of its institutional obstruction of the administration, set up a pathetic ‘fact-finding mission’ that would be considered a joke by any serious intelligence agency and compounded it by sending, at the behest of his wife, a shrill politically motivated poseur who, for the sake of 15 minutes’ celebrity on the cable gabfest circuit, misled the nation about what he found. . . . What we have here is, in effect, the old standby plot of lame Hollywood conspiracy thrillers: rogue elements within the CIA attempting to destabilize the elected government.”