AP: Berger Steps Down As Kerry Adviser

[West Coast Democrat]

By RON FOURNIER, AP Political Writer

WASHINGTON - Former national security adviser Sandy Berger, the subject of a criminal investigation over the disappearance of terrorism documents, stepped aside on Tuesday as an informal adviser to Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (news - web sites).

"Mr. Berger does not want any issue surrounding the 9/11 commission to be used for partisan purposes. With that in mind he has decided to step aside as an informal adviser to the Kerry campaign until this matter is resolved," said Lanny Breuer, Berger's attorney.

The investigation had threatened to become a political problem for Kerry a week before his nominating convention in Boston in which he hopes to persuade voters that he is ready to be commander in chief. The cornerstone of Kerry's argument against Bush is that he used faulty intelligence and poor judgment in waging war against Iraq (news - web sites).

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=703&e=1&u=/ap/20040720/ap_on_el_pr/berger_kerry

[Mistress Quickly]

1. Way to fight the pukes, Sandy eom

[West Coast Democrat]

7. I hope he continues to fight them

[DS1]

8. Yeah, no shit. Good going, putz

:eyes:

[Cocoa]

10. I think this is Kerry, not Berger

whatever the story is, and I'm certain it's nothing, Kerry has known all along about it. I think this will clear up, and Berger will be back.

[Frodo]

54. I'm not sure. Berger has certainly known about this for awhile

If he's been informed he's a target and has a lawyer... then he's known there was a problem for some time. If Kerry has known for some time then he should have gotten Berger's name off the campaign months ago.


And there's absolutely zero chance that "it's nothing".

[struggle4progress]

82. "Subject." Not "target." Let's get it straight.

<snip>
Berger and his lawyer said the former national security adviser has been told he is the "subject" of an investigation, not the "target" -- which normally means investigators have not decided whether they even have enough evidence to bring a charge.
<snip>
http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20040720-122249-1842r

[Frodo]

84. Not much of a difference to hang his hat on.

We already knew they haven't decided to charge him... since they haven't yet charged him.

But we do know (or at least it's been reported) that they Dept AG's office has turned down settlement offers and that the DAG has said Berger could do jail time.

[struggle4progress]

88. Sorry. Can't find any story on "settlement offers." Gotta link? eom

[Frodo]

89. It was CNN,

but I can't find it anymore. The only thing that comes up on a search is NewsMax and I hesitate to link them. Take it for what it's worth (not much).

Justice Department prosecutors reportedly have rejected several offers from former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger's lawyer to resolve the department's eight-month-long investigation into his illegal removal of top secret documents from the 9/11 Commission's reading room.

Two sources associated with the investigation told CNN that lawyer Lanny Breuer made a detailed statement of Berger's view of the facts at issue several months ago. According to the unnamed sources, Berger has offered to talk to the Justice Department about a resolution to the probe. In the intervening months, Breuer has renewed Berger's offer to come clean several times.

But in a bad omen for the former top Clinton national security official, the Justice Department has rebuffed the offer repeatedly and refused to enter into any discussions.

[Birthmark]

2. Rummy, Powell, Cheney, et al

...should study this closely.

[eyesroll]

3. This probably makes sense, actually

Takes the "Kerry-Sandy-oooh" issue away completely.

[soleft]

4. Wait a minute

They searched his home earlier this year. Why the hell weren't WE out in front of this? Kerry's people had to know this happened, didn't they? Forget why didn't the pubs timing - I'm pissed we weren't proactive and getting this out of the way when he returned the papers.

[Frodo]

55. How do you know we weren't?

What a lot of people miss in the 2000 fiasco is that, while the race was essentially 50-50 (allowing FL and the SC to decide it), the race would probably not have BEEN so close if it weren't for the DUI revelation a few days before the vote. There's no telling how much ground Bush lost from it, but it was certainly SOMETHING. If it was half of a percent (and I bet it was at least twice that), there would have been no recount and probably no popular vote victory for Gore.

Was it the news itself? Sure, to some extent... but it was also the TIMING. If the story had come out during June or July it would ahve been old news by the election.

Could easily be that Kerry saw this coming and feared that it was being held for November - when they could shout accusations that we would have no time to respond to. So HE leaked it out now. And it's close enough to the convention that we can creditibly spin it as a political hit job (which it surely would have been eventually).


I judge the likelyhood of this scenario at 20%.

[lancdem]

59. You make some excellent points

I still think Rove was behind it, but it's probably better to have this come out now than in late October.

[ALago1]

62. That is a really interesting analysis!

I agree with you!

[bluestateguy]

5. Better to get this out of the way this week

this will be gone from the news once the actual report comes out Thursday.

[Mr.Green93]

6. time to take down one of theirs

[hughee99]

11. BushCo didn't take Berger down,

it sounds like he F'd up on his own. Rove may have leaked this (which is his M.O.) but based on Berger's comments, Rove can't take credit for this. If Kerry had known about this months ago, he DEFINATELY should have taken action back then. Certainly once he won the nomination, Berger should have been quietly let go. Then the story probably would have read "Former Clinton NSA Sandy Berger..." and kept Kerry's name out of the whole damn thing. As far as the leak goes, it was probably better now than after the convention, so it's possible it was leaked preemptively by someone else to take the issue off the table come election season.

[lancdem]

15. The thing is, apparently this investigation

might even be over. Nothing has been done on it for months. It may not even be active.

[yardwork]

18. I disagree. This is total b.s. Berger hasn't been charged, and

if there is an "ongoing criminal investigation," it's because A$$croft started it back up this week.

This happened last October. There's nothing to it. I don't think Berger did anything wrong at all. He has the highest security clearance that exists. Berger was responsible for preventing the terrorist attacks planned for December 31, 1999.

The papers Berger's accused of taking were copies of drafts. They're obsolete. They don't matter. There's nothing important missing.

This is total b.s.

[trogdor]

42. Not only that, the stuff was declassified.

No longer a secret. Public. Passe.

Berger is calling their bluff. Good for him. He's saying, "well, OK. What have you got? I'm ready to answer all - and I mean all - of your questions. Is tomorrow morning good enough for you?"

DeLay is getting all worked up about nothing, and I just have to laugh my ass off at him.

[Frodo]

56. Whoa. That's a pretty strong reaction.

But it's a bit of an overreach. October-July is hardly a long time for that kind of an investigation to go on.

And the fact it was an early draft of a terrorism memo does NOT make it obsolete. Since HE was the source of the memo (from what I've read here), those marginal notes that shape the final wording could be CRITICAL.

And the reports say that documents ARE missing.

Berger's own statements are quite damning.

[Democat]

24. That is total bullshit - this is a Bush / Rove attack from the start

How many crimes do the Republicans get away with every single day?

Suddenly they have an interest in classified docs now that a Democrat is involved?

Get real, this is a Bush Admin planned attack with the press playing right along, as always.

[dennis4868]

68. I could not agree....

with you more my friend!

[hughee99]

69. Clearly the leak is an issue

But according to Berger's own statements, he is not completely innocent in this. The repukes aren't making something of nothing, they're making something big out of something small.

[bushisanidiot]

78. Oh, they had plenty to do with this. Apparently they kept track of

what he looked at.. so why did they let him leave with copies of the documents he looked at? Why did they bother to keep track in the first place?

Plus, if there was an "eye witness" who saw that he put documents in his clothing, why didn't they speak up before he left the building?

Also, if Berger was being so "sneaky" why the hell did he freely admit that he did take the documents? he must've been under the impression he could take them if he brought them back because he did bring them back on his own (the ones he could find). What did the archivists say when he brought the documents back? "Uh.. Mr. Berger, you aren't supposed to bring those back yet because we're investigating you!"?? why didn't he "lie" like AWOL does every day and say that he didn't take them?

It's clearly a well organized smear campaign designed to bring down Kerry.

[struggle4progress]

85. I think you've garbled the story.

My understanding is: Berger reviewed thousands of pages of documents, took handwritten notes, and carried those notes away. In the course of his review, a few draft documents got mixed up with his personal papers and were also carried away; when he later discovered this, he returned the draft docs but was uncertain whether he accidently discarded some materials.


Probe targets Clinton's security adviser
Associated Press
July 20, 2004

WASHINGTON -- President Clinton's national security adviser, Sandy Berger, is the focus of a criminal investigation after removing highly classified terrorism documents and handwritten notes from a secure reading room during preparations for the Sept. 11 commission hearings, The Associated Press has learned.

Berger's home and office were searched earlier this year by FBI agents armed with warrants after he voluntarily returned documents to the National Archives. However, some drafts of a sensitive after-action report on the Clinton administration's handling of al-Qaida terror threats during the December 1999 millennium celebration are still missing.
<snip>

"In the course of reviewing over several days thousands of pages of documents on behalf of the Clinton administration in connection with requests by the Sept. 11 commission, I inadvertently took a few documents from the Archives," Berger said.

"When I was informed by the Archives that there were documents missing, I immediately returned everything I had except for a few documents that I apparently had accidentally discarded," he said.
<snip>

http://www.indystar.com/articles/2/163810-2202-010.html

[Poiuyt]

9. Vote on this story

Give it a 1 so it gets off the front page fast

[foo_bar]

44. I don't think it works that way

[cspiguy]

12. krap!!!

n/t

[boneygrey]

13. good god

What will those sorry bastards do next. Nothing is beneath them. We shouldn't take this. Damn I'm pissed.

[madfloridian]

14. GOP won this round.

Who's next? This can not go on.

[lancdem]

16. We'll win the next couple rounds

when the 9/11 report comes out and Plame indictments are issued.

[ewagner]

17. Next RW meme:

What did Kerry know and when did he know it?

count on it.

I'm pissed at Berger for being a blockhead.
I'll be even more pissed if Kerry and staff knew about this and didn't get in front of it.

on edit: Kerry has to get out in front of this thing now....pre-empt the RW talking points...spin it that he holds people (and Berger) accountable for their unacceptable behavior...contrast Dubya "Who has Dubya fired for 1)screwed up intelligence? 2)Leaking the name of a CIA operative? 3)Mishandling post-invasion Iraq? 4) Abu Gharib?

That's about the best we can hope for in this f-ing mess......

[yardwork]

19. There's no evidence that Berger is a blockhead.

There's no evidence he did anything wrong.

[lancdem]

20. Berger has stepped down temporarily

BTW, I'm beginning to suspect this investigation actually ended months ago and this is nothing more than a smear.

[ewagner]

21. I hope you're right

If FBI/Justice comes out and says that it was a minor infraction and it's all over, then we'll be done with it.

But don't expect the Busheviks to let this die....I suspect they will continue to make hay with it until Thursday or so...and maybe even longer......

[azmesa207]

22. Berger has stepped down

OK DU get a grip it a non story he did nothing wrong and neither did Kerry

[SayitAintSo]

30. Several others have come forward in todays news saying they had done it

accidentally - James Woosley, Toobin and I'm sure others. Working in that field it's probably very common. It's just that the pukes will use their golden scream machine to spin this into something worse than kiddy porn. Pisses me to a fare-the-well....

:mad:

[Straight Shooter]

23. Josh Marshall at talking points memo has a good summary

"the National Archives began investigating this matter in October and then referred it to the FBI in January. That is, needless to say, at least six months ago. The article also notes that the FBI has yet to interview Berger, which suggests that the investigation has not reached a critical stage, for good or ill, that would have brought it to light now.

The most obvious, and probably the only, explanation of this leak is that it is intended to distract attention from the release of the 9/11 report due later this week. That would be yet another example of this administration's common practice of using the levers of executive power (law enforcement, declassification, etc.) for partisan purposes.

That doesn't mean Berger doesn't have any explaining to do. The two points are not exclusive of each other."

If there were anything to get excited about, then Josh would get excited about it. There isn't, he isn't, and that's the end of my worries about it.

[librechik]

61. 3 words: Primetime Convention Speech

now forever spoiled (or soon--Fox will have a field day dumping on Kerry for his "Bad advisors") They have a week to turn this allegation into a conviction and then conventional wisdom. Prepare yourself, comrades, it's going to be all Sandy all the time until Tuesday.

I am livid with rage over the way the Pukkkes have so callously spoiled the discourse in this country, using some of the lowest and dirtiest rhetorical tricks, with the full support of our media. It's truly nauseating.

Sandy was our most respected policy expert; everybody trusts him. --is it all gone now? Over a mere allegation?

Did I say yet tonight how much I hate these people?

[IndianaGreen]

25. This is a total travesty!

Sandy Berger is an honorable man. They said on CNN that the GOP was calling CNN several times alerting them about the story (which actually happened back in October).

The real crime here may well be a source in the Justice Department that leaked this.

[dolstein]

27. Yes, it's a travesty that Sandy Berger turned out to be a total f***up.

It's also a travesty that Bill Clinton turned out to be a sex addict.

But don't expect any sympathy from the electorate.

[KittyWampus]

33. Where's The Proof Berger Did Anything Wrong?

how do you know more than any of us?

All we know is Berger was investigated TEN MONTHS AGO. And it was wrapped up SIX MONTHS AGO.

Maybe, just MAYBE, this is all BULLSHIT.

[West Coast Democrat]

29. I also think the timing is interesting...

and we don't know whether Sandy actually did something wrong. I mean, look where this story originated.

[dolstein]

26. Sorry, but I will not be an apologist for Sandy Berger

Sure, the leak was obviously intended to inflict maximum damage on the Kerry campaign. But just like Clinton's Lewinsky scandal, this problem was ultimately one of Berger's own making.

Berger, by his own admission, knew that he violated procedure by taking his notes with him without prior clearance. And how exactly are we to believe that he "inadvertantly" took top secret national security memos with him? His defense appears to be one of gross incompetence.

Thanks Sandy. Thanks for giving Republicans the opportunity they've been waiting for to divert America's attention away from the Bush administration's many failures.

[lancdem]

58. The one thing we have going for us

is that the timing of this has itself become an issue, kind of the way Ken Starr's partisan zealousness became an issue along with Clinton's self-destructive behavior. That's not an excuse for Berger, because he should've kept his distance from Kerry as long as the investigation wasn't officially concluded.

[hightime]

28. The smartest man in the world just jumped out with my backpack on.

Wasn't that the punchline of that old joke? It applies here as well.

A report on U.S. Newswire states...."It is my understanding that Mr. Berger shoved this classified information into his clothing to smuggle them out of the National Archives. Press reports indicate that Archival staff became concerned when documents began to disappear and specifically marked additional documents to track them. A number of those documents also turned up missing." This is attributed to House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.).

If he not only took documents but also took marked documents, then that means he did it more than once. There is no excuse for that. The man is too intelligent for this to be an accident.

He did the right thing by stepping aside. I am not here to get Berger elected to shit!

[SayitAintSo]

31. Doesn't this start to smell a little to you....

"specifically marked additional documents to track them " ....

From what I understand - he was dealing with known COPIES. He knew he was not the SOLE keeper of the scrolls as it were...

I smell a rat, a dumbass too, but also a rat....

[IndianaGreen]

32. There is more to this story that meets the eye

Perhaps a special prosecutor is in order, afterall, who can trust the Justice Department when the leak about Berger originated there?

[KittyWampus]

34. And You Believe This WHY, Pray Tell?

this happened almost A YEAR AGO!

If these are the proven facts, then why wasn't he arrested, censured or whatever in JANUARY when things wrapped up?

[hightime]

35. One reason is he admits to taking them, he admits to losing some.

He isn't fighting the accusations.

I find it hard to believe that there is not video surveillance in the room in question. Perhaps he knows there is video, but that is mere conjecture on my part.
Pray tell, why do you think he would admit to something he didn't do?

[West Coast Democrat]

36. What did he admit to losing?

The notes he took or actual important documents? The accusations are vague.

[hightime]

37. "highly classified terrorism documents"

Berger's home and office were searched earlier this year by FBI agents armed with warrants after the former Clinton adviser voluntarily returned some sensitive documents to the National Archives and admitted he also removed handwritten notes he had made while reviewing the sensitive documents.

However, some drafts of a sensitive after-action report on the Clinton administration's handling of al-Qaida terror threats during the December 1999 millennium celebration are still missing, officials and lawyers told The Associated Press.


http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040720/D83UOCR00.html

[West Coast Democrat]

39. According to your link....

Sandy "admitted he also removed handwritten notes he had made while reviewing the sensitive documents"

[hightime]

40. ALSO......that meant there were others...right?

I am trying to answer the question put to me, but you are doing some mighty selective reading of my posts.

[West Coast Democrat]

41. But the other items were returned

according to your link.

[hightime]

46. This is what I know...

Breuer said the Archives staff first raised concerns with Berger during an Oct. 2 review of documents that at least one copy of the post-millennium report he had reviewed earlier was missing. Berger was given a second copy that day, Breuer said.

Officials familiar with the investigation said Archive staff specially marked the documents and when the new copy and others disappeared, Archive officials called Clinton attorney Bruce Lindsey to raise concerns.

Berger immediately returned all the notes he had taken, and conducted a search and located two copies of the classified documents on a messy desk in his office, Breuer said. An Archives official came to Berger's home to collect those documents but Berger couldn't locate the other missing copies, the lawyer said.

Breuer said Berger was allowed to take handwritten notes but also knew that taking his own notes out of the secure reading room was a "technical violation of Archive procedures, but it is not all clear to us this represents a violation of the law."




http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20040720/ap_on_re_us/sept__11_berger_probe

The man is not stupid. He knows the rules. Whereas the notes he took that day, not his notes from 1990, fall into a grey area, everything else is obviously not allowed. ( the 1990 notes are mentioned as also being taken and found at his office but not the object of this investigation)


In his statement Monday, Berger said that every Clinton administration document requested by the Sept. 11 commission was provided to the panel. Berger also said he returned some classified documents and all his handwritten notes when he was asked about them, except for two or three copies of the millennium report that may have been thrown away.

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20040720/D83UQ4PG1.html

[West Coast Democrat]

48. Maybe someone else took the "other copies"

or maybe they were never relevant anyway because they were just copies. It sounds like a technical infraction if there even was one.

[hightime]

51. technical infraction ?? Then you are not reading the reported news.

He admits he might have thrown the missing copies away. The handwritten notes he made that day are not the focus of the inquiry. Those same notes might be a technical infraction but not the papers he put in his pants and jacket. (there is a report of him putting papers in his socks but the source is not reliable. If reported by a reliable source.....this discussion is over and my mind is made up. As of now, he just fucked up and did the right thing by stepping aside.)

[JDPriestly]

57. If he had intentionally taken the document,

he wouldn't have had to ask for another copy of it. How does Berger know he took the documents? Maybe they were planted in his office?

[KittyWampus]

38. What Are The PROVEN FACTS As Found By The Investigation?

Did Berger take something?

When?

What EXACTLY did he take?

Was he found guilty of some misdeed by the investigation that happened ALMOST A YEAR AGO?

If so, why wasn't he arrested, censured whatever?

If NOT, then why are we hearing this story now?

[West Coast Democrat]

43. Also, If some documents are still missing...

I assume it's possible someone else could have taken them.

[hightime]

47. In his statement Monday, Berger said...

In his statement Monday, Berger said that every Clinton administration document requested by the Sept. 11 commission was provided to the panel. Berger also said he returned some classified documents and all his handwritten notes when he was asked about them, except for two or three copies of the millennium report that may have been thrown away.

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20040720/D83UQ4PG1.html

[West Coast Democrat]

49. Yes, I read that before...so who cares if he threw away "copies"?

and why is this suddenly important?

[hightime]

53. These are copies of HIGHLY SENSITIVE DOCUMENTS.

It is suddenly important for purely political reasons. It is an election year and these things count. Both sides will try to reveal all of their opponents warts. I am under no delusion as to why it is now coming out. I simply will not make excuses for it or try to belittle the importance of it. Again, he did the right thing by not hanging his luggage on Kerry. He fucked up and now he is roadkill....keep motoring on until the stench is behind us. I am not personally or politically invested in Sandy Berger.

[yardwork]

73. The source for this is Hastert. Do you believe it?

It sounds like total lying b.s.

The country owes Sandy Berger a great deal. He's not just some hack who wandered in off the street and stole documents.

This is a smear designed to divert attention from very real wrong-doing by the WH. Don't fall for it.

Don't drink the kool-aid.

[trogdor]

45. Anyway, you all have the Ron Fournier version.

This one is perhaps a bit more objective. It also has some rather interesting quotes from one Rep. Tom DeLay.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, told reporters the case was about theft and questioned Berger's statement attributing the removal of the documents and notes to sloppiness. Along with putting documents in his coat and pants, Berger acknowledged removing some documents in a portfolio. He returned most of the documents, but some still are missing.

"That's not sloppy," DeLay said. "I think its gravely, gravely serious what he did, if he did it. It could be a national security crisis."

http://apnews.excite.com/article/20040720/D83UQ4PG1.html

[West Coast Democrat]

52. Thanks for the link! Smells political!

[Fleshdancer]

50. This was obviously going to happen

I still have no clear picture of what happened (my guess is there's a whole mess of lies being swished around with the truth) but Berger distancing himself from Kerry is not a bad idea at this point.

I do want to hear more about this though and not just from the wing nuts over at faux news.

[shoopnyc123]

60. Was Kerry a nominee when this happened? (eom)

[JDPriestly]

63. This story is so intriguing

because it makes so little sense. From what I read, Berger was familiar with the documents (copies) he allegedly destroyed because he was involved in creating/editing, etc. them in 2000. So, why in the world would he deliberately take them out? Surely, he didn't need them. He probably has the facts they contain in his head. He could probably recite them even without his notes. As for Berger's notes, he probably made them to refresh his memory about specific dates and such before testifying for the Commission. Has anyone claimed the notes were so important that they would not have been cleared if someone took them out?

As I wrote earlier, I wonder if this is just an excuse to get a warrant to go into Dem and Kerry offices. Could be a Rove trick? Remember the mike hidden in Rove's wall in Texas? This seems sort of similar.

This story is so incomplete. It raises many questions. You can theorize a lot about it, but you can't draw any conclusions. There is just too little information.

[Justice]

65. Okay, Let's Stick to the facts.

Your statements incorrectly say he took them deliberately.

His statement says he inadvertently took out the documents.

[JDPriestly]

70. I don't say he took them deliberately.

The Repubs suggest it was not unintentional. Again, we don't have enough information on this yet.

[aneerkoinos]

64. Good!

Next to go, I hope, will be Rand Beers, Richard Holbrooke and the rest of Kerry's foreign policy team of imperialist, undemocratic warmongers and black ops schemers, who only make any honest democrat (with small d) with a conscience puke and think three times before voting Kerry...

[Beetwasher]

66. Interesting Thought: Will The CONTENTS of the Docs Be Made Public Now?

Are the chances of this now greatly improved?

Did Berger take one for the team? I think this is an obscure possibility that can't be over looked...Stay tuned...

[nolabels]

72. I doubt it

http://la.indymedia.org/news/2004/04/107605.php

Berger Time
What goes on in the pants of a highly flappable official
Tim Cavanaugh



Former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger has been caught with his pants on fire, and such is the gravity of the crisis that experts everywhere are solemnly avoiding the temptation toward instant position taking that occasionally mars the public discourse. But what the hell: I'm going to go out on a limb here and hazard a guess as to what was in those documents Berger secreted close by his membrum virile: I'm predicting it was something that makes Sandy Berger look stupid.

That doesn't mean the missing classified documents—which reportedly include several drafts of an after-action report on anti-terrorism during the millennium celebrations, handwritten notes, index cards treating the Middle East peace talks, and a paper cutout of a turkey made from a tracing of Berger's own hand and marked "To Maddy, Hapy (sic) Thanksgiving, 1997"—will not provide more general embarrassment for the Clinton administration; or that they don't comprise materials necessary for a full rendering of the 9/11 Commission's report; or that they might not give a boost to the embattled Bush White House.
(snip)
http://www.reason.com/links/links072004.shtml

I wishing him a safe trip home now :hi:

[Square_Peg]

67. Smart move by Bergler

Stepping down will keep the negative attention and scandal reprecussions limited to the Clinton legacy, and thus he will avoid tainting Kerry. It's a smart move on his part.

[sadiesworld]

80. AWWWWW...ain't that cute...

"Bergler". Let me guess, Limbaugh?

Question: Does a square peg fit in an asshole?

I think you know what to do next.

[28YOAT]

71. Sorry kids - but this ain't goin away any time soon!

As hard as the NYT and WP have tried to suppress this story, they are now reluctantly on board.

Even if you accept that this was an "honest mistake" on Berger's part (unlikely from a professional with a high security clearance and years of experience handling classified documents), the enemies of John Kerry will make the following charge:

Either 1) Berger was destroying documents that were embarrassing to the Clinton administration, or 2) Berger was stealing documents to transfer to the Kerry campaign.

No. 1 looks bad for Berger, but No. 2 could be absolutely lethal to Kerry! Berger may have single handedly sunk John Kerry’s campaign. This investigation is not new. If Kerry new about this all along, and continued to keep Berger on board, than this is even worse news for Kerry. Berger had better do what’s best for his party and fall on his sword and make it look like it was No. 1 - to head off the charge of No. 2.

What will Kerry say tomorrow if a reporter asks him “what did you know and when did you know it?”

[yardwork]

74. How sweet of you to join DU just in time to tell us all this!

Begone, freeper, before another investigation falls on your house!

[28YOAT]

75. So I guess you don't agree with my analysis?

Hey, I have two posts now. Am I cool yet?

[bklyncowgirl]

77. Reluctantly I agree. It's not going away.

The Republicans are going to hammer away at this. They want to destroy the credibility of anyone who stands against them. They'll use anything they can to do that.

I don't know what the truth is here. I don't know how someone as experienced as Sandy Berger could do something so incredibly stupid. The truth is he handed these bastards a weapon and they'll try to use it to destroy him, the 9/11 commission and John Kerry.

Democrats have to wake up and start screaming about the truly criminal acts of the Bush Adminsitration.

[fjc]

79. David Gergen put this all into perspective on CNN last night.

He said that it's all nothing more than election year politics. He said that Sandy Berger is guilty of no more than a technical violation of the rules of the National Archive, and that he did not break the law in any way. He also said emphatically that there was absolutely no breach of national security. He also said that Sandy Berger is a national hero for thwarting the millenium attack and should be regarded as such. I think all you people who have been wringing your collective hands on this are gonna be feeling foolish, and those on the other side of the political aisle who are deliberately misrepresenting it will likely be eating what their dishing out. And bon appetite to the lot of them.

[VolcanoJen]

93. Thank you for sharing the sanity of David Bergen!

His non-partisanship and clear-headedness is much needed at a time like this. :D

Thanks for this post, fjc! I've admired Gergen for decades, even when he was hard at work for the other side.

[sadiesworld]

81. Suppress this story?

God, you guys are hysterical, the lengths you will go to in order to preserve your liberal media myth.

[struggle4progress]

87. Berger was using copies. Any lost documents were copies. And ...

the 9/11 Commission says it still has copies of everything. So if enemies of John Kerry make the charges you suggest, they won't have a leg to stand on.

[saracat]

76. Boy ,am I glad everyone on this thread is Sooo much

smarter than Sandy Berger. No one knows why he did whatever he did and there may be a really good reason for it that outweighs electoral politics.And these were only copies of documents.The originals still exist.These are documents actually composed by Berger and his own notes regarding these docs.He has the highest of security clearances and he shouldn't have access to his own work? Doesn't that strike anyone as odd?Remember the 911 Commission itself was all in a wad about not being able to see this stuff or take their notes with them. They thought it was controlling and stupid of the WH.Maybe Sandy felt the same way.Maybe he needed the copies for testimony. But one thing for sure is , there is more to this than we know and Berger is not an idiot nor would he deliberately hurt the Dems for no reason.

[nolabels]

83. The 911 Commission is a Joke

http://www.anti-sheep.com/art/art.php
http://www.anti-sheep.com/articles/index.php
(below from this link, and not that I would trust Woodward that much)

Woodward Shares War Secrets
CBS News

Sunday 18 April 2004

Journalist Bob Woodward calls his new book, "Plan of Attack," the first detailed, behind-the-scenes account of how and why the president decided to wage war in Iraq.

It's an insider's account written after Woodward spoke with 75 of the key decision makers, including President Bush himself.

The president permitted Woodward to quote him directly. Others spoke on the condition that Woodward not identify them as sources.

Woodward discusses the secret details of the White House's plans to attack Iraq for the first time on television with Correspondent Mike Wallace.

Woodward permitted 60 Minutes to listen to tapes he recorded of his most important interviews, to read the transcripts, and to verify that the quotes he uses are based on recollections from participants in the key meetings. Both CBS News and Simon & Schuster, the publisher of Woodward's book, are units of Viacom.

Woodward says that many of the quotes came directly from the president: "When I interviewed him for the first time several months ago up in the residence of the White House, he just kind of out of the blue said, 'It's the story of the 21st Century,' his decision to undertake this war and start a preemptive attack on another country."

Woodward reports that just five days after Sept. 11, President Bush indicated to National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice that while he had to do Afghanistan first, he was also determined to do something about Saddam Hussein.

"There's some pressure to go after Saddam Hussein. Don Rumsfeld has said, 'This is an opportunity to take out Saddam Hussein, perhaps. We should consider it.' And the president says to Condi Rice meeting head to head, 'We won't do Iraq now.' But it is a question we're gonna have to return to,'" says Woodward.
(snip)
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/042004A.shtml

The Secret Service at Booker Elementary:
The Dog That Did Not Bark

(snip)
The fictional Sherlock Holmes solved the crime in "Silver Blaze" deducing that it is the owner of the house who is the criminal. How does he know? Because the dog did not bark. The only criminal who could could carry out the crime and not arouse the dog was a criminal the dog already knew as a friend, the dog's owner.

Now let us turn our Sherlockian logic on 9-11. Hijacked aircraft were wandering across the eastern half of the country. In theory nobody could have known how many there are or if more planes were not in the process of being hijacked. How could they? Two of the planes had crashed into the World Trade Center. There is an airport only four miles from Booker Elementary School, and Bush's presence at the school was in the news media days in advance. The Sarasota Herald Tribune announced Bush's visit to Booker on September 8th, given the 9-11 planners three days to include Bush as a target for a diving jetliner. Nobody could have safely assumed he was not a target.

And yet the Secret Service did not rush in and remove the President to a secure location, or at least to the safety of the armored Presidential Limousine. That's their job. That's what they do in the case of a real surprise attack with so many unknowns. They don't do anything else.

But the Secret Service did nothing. The dog did not bark.

Bush defenders try to explain away Bush's inaction as not wanting to upset the children. Michael Moore explains away Bush's inaction by suggesting he hadn't been told to leave. But Michael Moore failed to follow that line of reasoning through to its logical conclusion; where were the people whose job it is to get the President to a place of safety in event of attack, the people who would have, SHOULD have, pulled Bush out of there, children and public appearances be damned!
(snip)
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/9-11secretservice.html

[struggle4progress]

86. More links

Allegations Abound In Berger Inquiry
By BRYAN BENDER & PATRICK HEALY
The Boston Globe
Published Wednesday, July 21, 2004

<snip>
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 czar 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.
<snip>

GOP officials said the missing document raised questions about whether Berger was trying to keep information from the Sept. 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."
<snip>

http://www.theledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040721/NEWS/407210352/1039


GOP leaders say Clinton team to blame for intelligence failures
By PHILIP SHENON
THE NEW YORK TIMES
Wednesday, July 21, 2004

WASHINGTON -- The political haggling over the conclusions of the Sept. 11 commission began in earnest Tuesday, with commission leaders traveling to Capitol Hill for the first of a series of private briefings for members of Congress about the panel's final report.

After their briefing, House Speaker Dennis Hastert and other House Republican leaders held a news conference at which they suggested that the report, which is scheduled to be made public on tomorrow, would show that intelligence and law enforcement failures before the Sept. 11 attacks were more the responsibility of the Clinton administration than of the Bush administration.
<snip>

At the news conference, Hastert and other Republicans made repeated reference to the disclosure this week that President Clinton's national security adviser, Sandy Berger, was the subject of a criminal investigation after he acknowledged taking classified documents from the National Archives in preparation for his testimony to the Sept. 11 commission.
<snip>

The officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the report would show that the Clinton and Bush administrations made serious errors in dealing with the threat posed by al-Qaida, and that President Bush and his deputies were inattentive in the spring and summer of 2001 to intelligence suggesting an imminent catastrophic terrorist attack.
<snip>

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/182932_attacks21.html


Posted on Wed, Jul. 21, 2004
The missing documents conspiracy

<snip>
From Republicans: Samuel “Sandy” Berger, President Clinton’s national security adviser, stole classified documents from a secure National Archives 11 Commission. reading room while preparing to testify before the Sept. Obviously, he was trying to cover up for Clinton’s failure to contain, capture or kill Osama bin Laden.

From Democrats: Berger admitted taking the documents due to sloppiness and immediately returned them – last October, nine months ago. His actions are surfacing now only because Berger is an adviser to John Kerry, and Republicans are only trying to hurt Kerry by leaking the information.

While versions of these theories will be debated, the public should realize this incident is but an insignificant sideshow to the much more important focus of the 9-11 Commission: How security lapses and communications failures allowed the Sept. 11 attacks to occur and, more importantly, what changes should be made to prevent such failures in the future.
<snip>

http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/journalgazette/9206141.htm


Berger says document incident 'honest mistake,' but GOP calls for answers
4:19 a.m. July 21, 2004

WASHINGTON – Former national security adviser Sandy Berger says he regrets the way he handled classified terrorism documents, calling the whole thing "an honest mistake." Republicans say the matter raises questions about whether the former Clinton administration official sought to hide embarrassing materials.
<snip>

Kerry said later, "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 this campaign until this matter is resolved objectively and fairly."
<snip>

"Last year, when I was in the Archives reviewing documents, I made an honest mistake. It's one that I deeply regret," Berger said. "I dealt with this issue in October 2003 fully and completely. Everything that I have done all along in this process has been for the purpose of aiding and supporting the work of the 9/11 commission, and any suggestion to the contrary is simply, absolutely wrong."
<snip>

Al Felzenberg, spokesman for the Sept. 11 commission, said the Berger investigation will have no bearing on the panel's report.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/politics/20040721-0419-sept11-bergerprobe.html

[struggle4progress]

91. "...Berger associate and former White House lawyer Lanny Davis ...

... said 'I suggest that person is lying. And if that person has the guts, let's see who it is who made the comment that Sandy Berger stuffed something into his socks.'"

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/07/21/1350256


'Socks' Give Berger Story Legs, Former Clinton Official Says
By Susan Jones
CNSNews.com Morning Editor
July 21, 2004

Reports that former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger stuffed top-secret documents into his pants and socks made the story bigger than it is, said a former member of the Clinton administration on Wednesday.
<snip>
"Part of it is that it's about the war on terror; part of it is Sandy Berger's position in the campaign; part of it is the timing -- but without those socks, this thing wouldn't have taken off like it did yesterday," (Stephanopoulos) said with a smile.
<snip>

The report of pants- and socks-stuffing is "absolutely false," said Berger's attorney Lanny Breuer on Wednesday. In several network news appearances, he said that Berger has acknowledged putting notes in his coat pocket and his pants pocket -- but never stuffing them down his pants or socks.

Breuer told ABC News that not once in the past ten months has "anyone from the Department of Justice or the Archives ever made any kind of a representation of that, or claim like that, to me. It just didn't happen," he said.
<snip>

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=%5CPolitics%5Carchive%5C200407%5CPOL20040721b.html

[JDPriestly]

92. Document production (review)

Has anyone who is judging Berger ever done document review? I have done a lot of it. It is probably an easier and neater process in the Archives than in the situations I have done it. But, believe me, although I have had a lot of experience doing it, have developed habits and procedures for doing it carefully and am meticulous with documents, I confess, I occasionally mess up.

It is confusing to remember whether the document in your hand is a copy or an original. They often look the same. If you take documents that are not numbered out of a box or folder, you may put them back in the wrong order. Some people are incapable of even keeping documents on top of their desk organized.

If Berger had copies in his folder of documents from his home files that looked a little like the documents in the Archives, he could have mixed up the Archives documents with his own and taken the Archives documents home "inadvertently." As I said, I am meticulous with documents, yet, occasionally, I get confused about which document is the original -- especially if I've been working for a long time without breaks, food, etc. It is just the nature of this kind of work, especially if you are working quickly.

Sometimes you start to focus on the content of the documents, rather than the process of handling them. That is when accidents happen. This could be a special problem for Berger who has a reputation for being messy and is probably very focused and prone to be absent-minded.

Let's wait to judge this situation. The accusations may be true, but there is a good chance they aren't, and this is just part of the political game.

[bobbyboucher]

90. By saying "Until this matter is resolved", means it's BS.

He wouldn't say that unless he believes that this is a political game used to distract from the big ones that are about to drop.

Man, the Repubes will stop at nothing, and I knew this, but to see all of them jump on this loser of a story really makes one think that they are trully corrupt, top to toe.

[Pallas180]

94. Shell Game. Same Day Paper Announces Criminal Investigation of Cheney but

if you put all the attention on SAndy Berger stealing "state" secrets
that he himself wrote, then whose going to notice that Dick Cheney
and Halliburton are under criminal investigation for their offshore
company selling to Libya, Iran, Iraq and Syrria on the "forbidden
list" for a US Company, and profits hidden in Swiss BAnk Accounts-
which is why Treasury is investigating - the "Al Capone" move -
get em on taxes when you can't get em on anything else.

What was Halliburton/Cheney selling?

components that could be converted for nuclear use..like caps to
set of THE bomb or at least a dirty bomb.

here's the story, NOTICE THE DATE, same day as Berger investigation
announced:

"Halliburton admits to criminal probe on Iran July 20 2004"

http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.co...

Business / Middle East & Africa Print article | Email


Halliburton admits to criminal probe on Iran
By Joshua Chaffin in Washington
Published: July 20 2004 18:22 | Last Updated: July 20 2004 18:22


Halliburton, the oilfield services company formerly headed by US vice-president Dick Cheney, has disclosed that a Treasury department probe into its business dealings with Iran had been elevated to a criminal investigation.


The company acknowledged that it had been subpoenaed by a grand jury in the southern district of Texas to present documents related to a Cayman Islands subsidiary that serves the Iranian National Oil Company.

Halliburton said it would co-operate with the investigation, and that it believed it had complied with US trade restrictions against Iran.

The subpoena has emerged at a time when Iran has come under fresh scrutiny in Washington for its possible links to al-Qaeda.

President George W. Bush, who has dubbed Iran a member of the "axis of evil", on Monday said he would investigate claims in a forthcoming report on the September 11 terrorist attacks that the country might have offered safe passage to some of the hijackers who carried out the plot. The existence of the grand jury will add to the legal woes for Halliburton, which is also being investigated for possibly overcharging the US military for meals and fuel importation in Iraq.

The company's ties to the vice-president have made it an appealing target in Congress for critics of the Bush administration.

Senator Frank Lautenberg, a Democrat from New Jersey, yesterday insisted that the investigation consider any role played by Mr Cheney when he headed the company from 1995 to 2000.

Halliburton is also expected to be the focal point of a hearing tomorrow that will examine cost overruns and other problems with Iraq contracts, of which Halliburton has the largest share.

Wendy Hall, a Halliburton spokesperson, said: "It is important to understand, especially in the current political environment, that this is not a condemnation of the company, but a method of further studying the facts.

"We continue to believe that Halliburton's business in Iran is in compliance with applicable laws and regulations."

The US imposed sanctions on Iran following the 1979 revolution that led to the seizure of American hostages for more than a year.

Halliburton's work there, which has raised complaints from shareholders, amounts to about $80m a year - less than 1 per cent of its total revenues.

The Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control first requested information from Halliburton in mid-2001.

[Buzz_Killer]

95. What a genius...

Any good spook would have used the super tiny button-hole camera... Clinton-Kerry-Edwards should have told him not to use the "secret document stuffed in the underwear" method...

[middleeast_org]

96. Do you believe it

I would typically not believe something like this, but the fact that he stepped down so quickly makes me think he may have something to hide. Only time will tell.

www.middleeast.org