Sandy Berger Gets Away With It
What's that smell? It's a rat. Sandy Berger has agreed to plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge related to his pilfering of classified documents. Here's the money quote from the New York Times:
When the issue surfaced last year, Mr. Berger insisted that he had removed the classified material inadvertently. But in the plea agreement reached with prosecutors, he is expected to admit that he intentionally removed copies of five classified documents, destroyed three and misled staff members at the National Archives when confronted about it, according to an associate of Mr. Berger's who is involved in his defense but who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the plea has not been formalized in court.
What this means is that the former National Security Advisor to President Clinton, at a time when the nation was in the process of attempting, through the 9/11 Commission, to establish how the intelligence catastrophe of 9/11 -- arguably the worst in our history -- could have occurred, intentionally destroyed key classified documents that could have (we'll now never known) shed light on possible negligence on the part of a Democratic President and his administration (including Mr. Berger himself).
What this means is that a senior advisor to a Democratic Presidential candidate, John Kerry, at a time when Kerry and his surrogates were trying to make a case that President Bush had been negligent in failing to foresee the 9/11 catastrophe -- again, arguably the worst single attack on America in our history -- intentionally destroyed key classified documents that might have pointed the finger of blame back at Democrats.
This is worse than Watergate. This may be the biggest political scandal in our history. But, apparently, the Justice Department is going to let Berger off with a slap on the wrist. One would hope that they would enter in the plea bargain only with the assurance that Berger would provide evidence implicating others. Who did he tell about the documents? Who asked him to destroy them? Who stood to profit if the truth was suppressed or erased? Whose legacy would be tarnished if they saw the light of day? Whose future aspirations would be thwarted?
Who indeed? Two guesses.
This is the Democratic Party in the Clinton Era. If historical documents hurt them, they destroy the evidence, secure in the belief that the media will never do to them what they did to President Nixon regarding the missing 18 minutes of tape. If fake documents would help them, they create the documents, secure in the belief that the useful idiots at CBS will run with them without any meaningful vetting.
Is it a conspiracy or is it a coincidence that the Berger story was dumped on a Friday, just when the weather is going to be good for the first time all winter over much of the country, just when the Final Four is going to be dominating people's attention, just when baseball season is starting, just when Terri Schiavo died, and just when the greatest man of the last century, Pope John Paul II, lingers near death? My bet is on conspiracy.
When the issue surfaced last year, Mr. Berger insisted that he had removed the classified material inadvertently. But in the plea agreement reached with prosecutors, he is expected to admit that he intentionally removed copies of five classified documents, destroyed three and misled staff members at the National Archives when confronted about it, according to an associate of Mr. Berger's who is involved in his defense but who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the plea has not been formalized in court.
What this means is that the former National Security Advisor to President Clinton, at a time when the nation was in the process of attempting, through the 9/11 Commission, to establish how the intelligence catastrophe of 9/11 -- arguably the worst in our history -- could have occurred, intentionally destroyed key classified documents that could have (we'll now never known) shed light on possible negligence on the part of a Democratic President and his administration (including Mr. Berger himself).
What this means is that a senior advisor to a Democratic Presidential candidate, John Kerry, at a time when Kerry and his surrogates were trying to make a case that President Bush had been negligent in failing to foresee the 9/11 catastrophe -- again, arguably the worst single attack on America in our history -- intentionally destroyed key classified documents that might have pointed the finger of blame back at Democrats.
This is worse than Watergate. This may be the biggest political scandal in our history. But, apparently, the Justice Department is going to let Berger off with a slap on the wrist. One would hope that they would enter in the plea bargain only with the assurance that Berger would provide evidence implicating others. Who did he tell about the documents? Who asked him to destroy them? Who stood to profit if the truth was suppressed or erased? Whose legacy would be tarnished if they saw the light of day? Whose future aspirations would be thwarted?
Who indeed? Two guesses.
This is the Democratic Party in the Clinton Era. If historical documents hurt them, they destroy the evidence, secure in the belief that the media will never do to them what they did to President Nixon regarding the missing 18 minutes of tape. If fake documents would help them, they create the documents, secure in the belief that the useful idiots at CBS will run with them without any meaningful vetting.
Is it a conspiracy or is it a coincidence that the Berger story was dumped on a Friday, just when the weather is going to be good for the first time all winter over much of the country, just when the Final Four is going to be dominating people's attention, just when baseball season is starting, just when Terri Schiavo died, and just when the greatest man of the last century, Pope John Paul II, lingers near death? My bet is on conspiracy.
posted by PDB at 7:15 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home