Sandy Berger's Socks

[Monte Smith]

Now this is interesting. I never stuff anything into my socks unless I know I am hiding it:

Former national security adviser Sandy Berger is under criminal investigation for taking highly classified terrorism documents from a secure reading room in the National Archives. The documents should have been turned over to the 9/11 commission. Berger's home and office were searched by the FBI.

Berger has admitted he removed handwritten notes by placing them in his jacket, pants and socks, and also *inadvertently* took copies of classified documents in a portfolio. Now what he stuffed in his socks were handwritten notes. But the government considers handwritten notes made from classified documents to be themselves classified documents.

Berger announced tonight that he would no longer serve as security brain for the Democrat presidential bid, saying he didn't want to diminish the work of the Sept. 11 commission. Or, one supposes, fuck up Kerry's chances.

What was Sandy up to? Was he saving either himself, or his former boss Clinton, or his very recent boss Kerry some embarrassment? The documents that are missing relate to action (or inaction) by the Clinton admin in response to 1990s al Qaeda threats. I don't think Berger is a bad man, I think he made a bad mistake.

[Brian Olewnick]

I was sitting around all day waiting to see if one of the pro-Kerry camp (of which, admittedly, I'm a reluctant member) would post anything on the Berger affair.

Amazingly (cough, cough) no post appeared! No scathing denunciations! No pronouncements on the undermining of the system by sleazoids! The guy says he "apparently accidentally" disposed of a few of the documents. Not a raised eyebrow?!?!

Do you think that maybe, just possibly, had the alleged culprit been a GW cabinet member that, again just possibly, we may have seen a post or two from several of our esteemed brethren?

Hypocrisy is a two-way street, baby. Plenty of sleaze to go around.

[Monte Smith]

Oh now come on, Brian. The double standard is as established an American policy as One China.

[SinginSumo]

Does anyone in Washington have a clue?

[Gentle Giant]

I had the day off today so I wasn't online to post what strikes me as very obvious.

He's a lying liar.

[Dr Dave]

Sandy Berger must die! He is an Al Qaeda operative!

[Ron Thorne]

Originally Posted by Brian Olewnick

Hypocrisy is a two-way street, baby. Plenty of sleaze to go around.

With all due respect Brian, that's hardly a headline-grabbing observation. Now let's see what actually filters down, while Monte puts another feather (or whatever) in his sock.

If true, Berger must have some damn BIG socks, that's all I can say. And, if true, he's a lying sack o' shit. There, does that make a few of you happy?

[Monte Smith]

Originally Posted by patricia

Of course, nobody is coming forward with these accusations, particularly about the socks.

No one but the Washington Post this morning. And it was Berger's lawyer who admitted that Berger had taken the documents. Sandy is now denying the sock part.

Originally Posted by patricia

Interesting timing, since this has been going on for several months.

What? The purloining of sensitive documents?

Originally Posted by patricia

Also, the documents that Berger removed from the archives are not the originals, but unauthorized for removal copies. It's not as if he was ankling off with the originals.

They are what? It is the information that is classified, not the "originals."

Originally Posted by patricia

The stuffing something in his socks accusations and the others would have a lot more credibility if they weren't from "un-named sources".

I bet the unnamed source's initials are S.B. What a beaut. "Well yes, I did illegally remove classified documents to pass them off or lose them, but the reports that I put them in my socks is ludicrous." What a cover!

[crawjo]

Gosh, who ever would have thought that a member of the Clinton administration might have something to hide about how the Al Qaeda threat was handled over the span of several years?

[Captain Hate]

This is hilarious; even when they're out of office the Clintonoids are screwing the pooch. Hey, maybe he's trying to embarrass Kerry so that the bovine in pantsuits can run in 2008!! If Berger wants to scuttle Kerry all he has to do is make sure he doesn't go on vacation anymore.

[Monte Smith]

Originally Posted by crawjo

Gosh, who ever would have thought that a member of the Clinton administration might have something to hide about how the Al Qaeda threat was handled over the span of several years?

You're jumping to conclusions that the Clinton administration has something to hide about how the al Qaeda threat was handled. For my part, I don't believe the Clinton administration was ever in anyway involved with the al Qaeda threat.

Berger might have been creating campaign cheat sheets for his new boss, Kerry, rather than washing up behind himself and Clinton. It's one possibility, at any rate.

All supposition at this point.

[willy]

Gee. What a surprise...



N.Y. Times buries
Berger story
'Paper of record' relegated big news to page 16

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: July 20, 2004
12:25 p.m. Eastern

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

The startling revelation that former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger is under criminal investigation for pocketing highly classified terrorism documents was buried on page A-16 in today's edition of the New York Times.

While the story earned front-page coverage in USA Today, America's "paper of record" ran a wire story in a small box on the bottom of its last news page in the A section, one page before the editorials.

Among the articles the Times did feature on its front page was a story about how untucked shirts in the workplace are the latest fashion trend.

The Washington Post's front page has the Berger story at the top of page A-2.

The former Clinton aide is the focus of a Justice Department investigation for removing the documents and handwritten notes from a secure reading room prior to the Sept. 11 Commission hearings.

He has been serving as a national security adviser to John Kerry's campaign.

FBI agents searched Berger's home and office after he voluntarily returned some documents to the National Archives. However, the Associated Press reports, still missing are 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.

[willy]

More on Sandy Burgler



Ashcroft: Berger doc exposes security lapse
Terror-threat paper at center of criminal probe not shared with incoming Bush administration

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: July 20, 2004
5:00 p.m. Eastern

By Art Moore

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

In testimony before the 9-11 Commission in April, Attorney General John Ashcroft pointed to a National Security Council document now at the center of the FBI's investigation of former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, urging the panel to ask why its warnings and "blueprint" to thwart al-Qaida's plans to target the U.S. were ignored by the Clinton administration and not shared with the incoming Bush security staff.

Drafts of the sensitive NSC "Millennium After Action Review" on the Clinton administration's handling of al-Qaida terror threats during the December 1999 millennium celebration are reported to be among the documents still missing from classified materials Berger removed from a secure reading room.

Ashcroft said the review – which he was not shown prior to 9-11 – recommends, 17 months before the attacks, "disrupting the al-Qaida network and terrorist presence here using immigration violations, minor criminal infractions and tougher visa and border controls."

Ashcroft told the commission, "It is clear from the review that actions taken in the Millennium Period should not be the operating model for the U.S. government."

The March 2000 review, Ashcroft told the panel, warns the Clinton administration "of a substantial al-Qaida network and affiliated foreign terrorist presence within the U.S., capable of supporting additional terrorist attacks here."

Ashcroft said the "highly-classified" review "was not among the 30 items upon which my predecessor [Janet Reno] briefed me during the transition. It was not advocated as a disruption strategy to me during the [2001] summer threat period by the NSC staff which wrote the review more than a year earlier."

The strategy advocated by the review, Ashcroft said, includes "the same aggressive, often criticized law enforcement tactics we have unleashed for 31 months to stop another al-Qaida attack."

"I certainly cannot say why the blueprint for security was not followed in 2000," he said. "I do know from my personal experience that those who take the kind of tough measures called for in the plan will feel the heat. I've been there; I've done that. So the sense of urgency simply may not have overcome concern about the outcry and criticism which follows such tough tactics."

Millennium plot

The millennium plot involved planned attacks on Israeli and U.S. tourists in Jordan, on the USS Sullivans in Yemen and the Los Angeles airport.

On Dec. 12, 1999, Jordanian authorities thwarted plans to bomb the Raddison Hotel in Amman and Mount Nebo, the site on the Jordan River where John the Baptist is said to have baptized Jesus. Twenty-two of the 28 suspects were tried, including Boston cab driver Raed Hijazi, who was sentenced to life in prison.

The bomb-laden boat deployed to attack the USS Sullivans was overloaded and sank before detonating.

Algerian terrorist Ahmed Ressam was arrested Dec. 14, 1999 trying to enter the U.S. from Canada at Port Angeles, Wash., when he was found to be in possession of nitroglycerin.

During his trial, Ressam revealed he had been trained in a terrorist camp in Afghanistan run by bin Laden. At the camp were jihadists from Central Asia, the Philippines, the Middle East and China who learned how to blow up a nation's infrastructure and conduct rocket-launching, urban warfare, assassination and sabotage.

Berger is the focus of a Justice Department investigation for removing the documents and handwritten notes from a secure reading room prior to the Sept. 11 Commission hearings. He had been serving as a national security adviser to John Kerry's campaign but announced today he is stepping down.

The officials said the missing documents included critical assessments about the Clinton administration's handling of the millennium terror threats as well as identification of America's terror vulnerabilities at airports to seaports.

Berger had ordered his anti-terror czar, Richard Clarke, in early 2000 to write the after-action report.

Berger testified that during the millennium period, "we thwarted threats and I do believe it was important to bring the principals together on a frequent basis" to consider terror threats more regularly.

Defenders of the Clinton administration testified at the 9/11 commission hearings that the White House's high-level meetings kept the nation on alert, foiling the Los Angeles airport plot.

But the customs agent who stopped Ressam at the border, Diana Dean, says it was her gut instincts, not an alert White House that prevented disaster.

No one had told her to be on a special lookout for terrorists, she said in an April interview with NBC News.

Commission member Timothy Roemer declared April 13 that the Clinton administration had a "great deal of success during this time period. My theory is, because of this small group that is meeting at the top levels of government."

But Dean said Roemer's story "didn't make sense to me."

Recalling the incident, Dean said she had a hunch something wasn't quite right and asked Ressam to open his trunk. Big bags of white powder, first thought to be drugs, were found, but the tests came back negative.

When further probing uncovered timers, investigators realized the powder was explosives.

"My heart dropped right into my toes when I realized what it was," Dean told NBC.

She says didn't remember any warnings of specific threats, adding, "I don't recall anybody saying watch for terrorists."

Who's to blame?

During the Sept. 11 hearings in April, commissioner Jamie Gorelick, former assistant attorney general under President Clinton, tried to put National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice on the spot for the Bush administration's purported failure to heed advice from the previous administration.

Gorelick pointed to a report from 2001 that indicated, in her own words, that "we have big systemic problems. The FBI doesn't work the way it should, and it doesn't communicate with the intelligence community."

In the ensuing dialogue, however, Rice apparently implicated Gorelick in the allegation.

Gorelick: Now, you have said that your policy review was meant to be comprehensive. You took your time because you wanted to get at the hard issues and have a hard-hitting, comprehensive policy. And yet there is nothing in [the policy review] about the vast domestic landscape that we were all warned needed so much attention. Can you give me the answer to the question why?
Rice: I would ask the following. We were there for 233 days. There had been a recognition for a number of years before – after the '93 [World Trade Center] bombing, and certainly after the [thwarted] millennium [attack in Los Angeles] – that there were challenges inside the United States, and that there were challenges concerning our domestic agencies and the challenges concerning the FBI and the CIA. We were in office 233 days. It's absolutely the case that we did not begin structural reform at the FBI.

In his testimony before the commission, Ashcroft pinned blame on Gorelick for issuing a 1995 memo that established a "wall" between the criminal and intelligence divisions, hindering the ability of the U.S. government to detect the Sept. 11 plot.

The document by Gorelick [pdf file], who served as deputy attorney general under President Clinton, helped establish the "single greatest structural cause" for Sept. 11, which was "the wall that segregated criminal investigators and intelligence agents," Ashcroft said in his prepared statement.

[crawjo]

Berger has been fired from his "advisory" role in the Kerry campaign.

[Monte Smith]

Originally Posted by crawjo

Berger has been fired from his "advisory" role in the Kerry campaign.

Fired? I thought he quit, saying he didn't want to diminish the work of the Sept. 11 commission. Har har.

[patricia]

Originally Posted by Monte Smith

Fired? I thought he quit, saying he didn't want to diminish the work of the Sept. 11 commission. Har har.

Kind of like George Tenet "quitting" to spend more time with his now college-age son, who apparently was fine without him around during his actual formative years.

[bluenoter]

I didn't post about it because

1. I was away all day, and

2. The story just broke today, right? It's still developing. When I left, Berger hadn't yet resigned as a Kerry adviser.

Willy--

Oh yeah, I always trust that beacon of mainstream journalism WorldNetDaily.

[crawjo]

Of course, Brian is right that if this had been, say, Condi Rice, there would have been a thread about it right away, and by now we'd be on page two or three of replies and so forth.

But really, who cares? JC is a lefty haven, and most of the time, I like it that way. I actually think there might be a rather dull reason for this whole escapade, now that I think about it. I mean, if there are originals of the documents that the man was trying to swipe, then we can all find out what he was trying to hide. Or perhaps he was interested in leaking something damaging to Bush to the media? On further reflection, it seems that my gut reaction, that Berger was trying to steal documents that were damaging to Clinton or the Democrats in some way, doesn't make a whole lot of sense. There's probably some other reason. Either way, he screwed up, and there will be some little scandal over it. But does it change the issues in this election? I don't think so. Just like I don't think Bush's guard records from 30 years ago should be an issue. Let's debate what is actually happening right now, instead of breathlessly following every potential scandal to see how many points we can score against our political enemies.

[patricia]

Originally Posted by crawjo

Of course, Brian is right that if this had been, say, Condi Rice, there would have been a thread about it right away, and by now we'd be on page two or three of replies and so forth.

But really, who cares? JC is a lefty haven, and most of the time, I like it that way. I actually think there might be a rather dull reason for this whole escapade, now that I think about it. I mean, if there are originals of the documents that the man was trying to swipe, then we can all find out what he was trying to hide. Or perhaps he was interested in leaking something damaging to Bush to the media? On further reflection, it seems that my gut reaction, that Berger was trying to steal documents that were damaging to Clinton or the Democrats in some way, doesn't make a whole lot of sense. There's probably some other reason. Either way, he screwed up, and there will be some little scandal over it. But does it change the issues in this election? I don't think so. Just like I don't think Bush's guard records from 30 years ago should be an issue. Let's debate what is actually happening right now, instead of breathlessly following every potential scandal to see how many points we can score against our political enemies.

All good points, Crawjo. It would seem to me that trying to solve the "problems" in Afghanistan, such as the bumper crop of poppies, and the violence, still emerging and figuring out what is going to be done in Iraq should be front and centre, not to mention the North American economy. All the smoke and mirrors, such as same sex marriage, unauthorized notes on archive material, army records and all the other periferal issues should be back-burnered. Come on guys, people are dying in Iraq and in Afghanistan still.
The ecomomy is not improving, if you ask all those people who have lost their jobs in the last four years. The stock market may be more healthy, but companys' bottom lines don't necessarily mean that there has been a surge of new jobs. They simply mean that companys' profits have risen. Part of that, a big part, is due to reductions in staff, which is one of the biggest parts of a company's overhead. Less overhead, more profit, higher stock value. A minimum wage part-time job, with no benefits and low wages is what a summer job used to be. Now people are trying to support families with one. That is not good enough. As somebody in the not too distant past said, "It's The Economy, Stupid".

[willy]

Unfortunately for the left the economy IS improving and in a big way. That's why the pundits on the left and their friends in the media aren't harping on it anymore. It's amazing how anything good for the country is bad for liberals.


Senators link Kerry
to Berger scandal
2 Republicans say candidate
should explain ex-aide's role

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: July 21, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

WASHINGTON – Two Republican senators yesterday demanded presidential candidate John Kerry explain the role of Sandy Berger in his campaign, following revelations the Justice Department is investigating the former national security adviser for taking highly classified documents related to the Sept. 11 terrorism investigation out of the National Archives.

Sen. Gordon Smith, R-Ore., accused Berger of "taking highly classified documents, stuffing them in his trousers, using them for the Kerry campaign, and then admitting to destroying those documents."

"He says it was sloppy," said Smith. "I will admit to you, when you stuff classified legal documents in your briefs, it looks sloppy. But it may be worse than that. And in fairness to the president of the United States, it's important that this be followed and pursued so that the American people can know that the predicate of many of the charges made against George W. Bush are based upon lies and deception. And the American people need the truth on these matters."

Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., said he found it coincidental that the missing documents had to do with security at airports and seaports – areas in which Kerry has been critical of Homeland Security policies.

"Now, I would hope that, number one, the Kerry administration would immediately disavow any connection with Sandy Berger, that they would come forward with any documents, whether legal or illegal documents, that have been presented to them by Sandy Berger, and that we can bring this matter to a close very quickly," Chambliss said. "No accusations are being made about how they used or if they used these documents, but this is extremely sensitive, folks, and this involves a significant breach in our intelligence community, and the Kerry campaign needs to come forward with the answers to this."

Chambliss went on to point out that after the documents were taken, "John Kerry held a photo-op and attacked the president on port security. The documents that were taken may have been utilized for that press conference. They were then destroyed, according to Mr. Berger."

"And as a member of the Intelligence Committee, I deal with classified documents every single day," he said. "We know better. And Sandy Berger knew better. And for gosh sakes, Senator Kerry knows better than to utilize those documents in any way, and we think it needs to be called into question as to whether or not they have."

[crawjo]

Originally Posted by willy

Unfortunately for the left the economy IS improving and in a big way. That's why the pundits on the left and their friends in the media aren't harping on it anymore. It's amazing how anything good for the country is bad for liberals.

That's politics, and it has nothing to do with the left. When you are the opposition party, bad news is good news (for you) and good news needs to be spun as bad news. When the news is something as serious as a war, this can be a very difficult maneuver. You are placed in the uncomfortable position of having to criticize the commander-in-chief while soldiers are in the line of fire on the battlefield. I might be wrong on this, but I think history has shown that incumbents tend to do very well while there is a war on. But at the same time it appears that the public's confidence in Bush's prosecution of the war is now on the wane, which means there is an opening for Kerry if he can get his message right. A big if.

[Uli]

Originally Posted by willy

It's amazing how anything good for the country is bad for liberals.

What is really amazing is that fair Ollie does not jump on such vicious and malicious bs.

[Monte Smith]

Originally Posted by patricia

Interesting that this is coming out now, considering that the Democratic National Convention is on the horizon.

So said Bill Clinton: "I think the timing is interesting." So said Dee Dee Myers last night on HARDBALL. "What I find interesting is the timing." And that loathsome sister of Barney Frank, Ann Lewis, former mouthpiece for Hillary Clinton, also had it on her cue cards. "The timing is interesting."

Yes, the timing is always interesting. The timing would have been even more interesting if the time was next week and the Dem convention was in progress. If there are Ominous Forces behind this story, why didn't they wait until next week, when the timing would have been blockbuster?

Or, if your mind really turns toward the hidden scheme, why suspect only the one party? Isn't it *interesting* that these revelations about Sandy Berger--undisputed revelations--come out into the light only when John Kerry is on vacation and secluded from press scrutiny? Gosh!

And patricia, really. You have done nothing on this thread except to try to change the subject. I don't understand this, since it is an unworthy trick, one that I would be too embarrassed to attempt--given that every poster and his dog would call me on it if I tried.

Faced with the prospect of an American security official stuffing documents in his trousers, you've diverted us to the justness of the Iraq War, "un-named sources," the Afghan drug trade, George Tenet, the economic recovery, and now the safety of Iraqi women. All fine topics, but none of them germaine to Sandy Berger.

[Darryl G. Thomas]

Actually rumor has it that the Berger expose's coming out in time for the release of the 9/11 Commission's report as a distraction.

I'm a Democrat. I'm voting for Kerry. But I think if Berger removed, copied, or stole classified documents he should be prosecuted. Here's why. I've held security clearances. You screw up you get destroyed. But time and again politicos of all stripes, conservative, liberal, etc. screw up security wise and get away with it, at worse get a slap on the wrist. Meanwhile us worker bee proles have to stay on our p's and q's or we lose our clearances, jobs, and could face some jail time.

[Monte Smith]

Originally Posted by Darryl G. Thomas

Actually rumor has it that the Berger expose's coming out in time for the release of the 9/11 Commission's report as a distraction.

Funny: on Monday I listened to complaints from Dems on Washington Journal that Bush was using the Commission's national tour as a distraction from Iraq and as a whitewash for his crimes. Now that we have Sandy, he's a distraction from what would have been considered the distraction. It gets rather too precious at this point.

Originally Posted by Darryl

I'm a Democrat. I'm voting for Kerry. But I think if Berger removed, copied, or stole classified documents he should be prosecuted. Here's why. I've held security clearances. You screw up you get destroyed. But time and again politicos of all stripes, conservative, liberal, etc. screw up security wise and get away with it, at worse get a slap on the wrist. Meanwhile us worker bee proles have to stay on our p's and q's or we lose our clearances, jobs, and could face some jail time.

I agree. By the way, do you recall when that talentless DCI, John Deutch, got busted for taking home a laptop with classified material after he retired? What a frigging idiot. He went unpunished because the security types at the top tend to protect one another.

Deutch was an idiot. You want to talk about dropping the ball on al Qaeda, the big intelligence operation on his (blessedly) brief watch was a town hall meeting with Maxine Waters trying to explain to her constituency that the CIA did not invent AIDS and crack cocaine as a way to destroy downtown Los Angeles. Talk about a poor priority for our chief of spies.

[Darryl G. Thomas]

I remember Deutch, he was a waste of office space.

What I'm curious about is this: Just to get within beathing space of these documents you're supposed to have background investigations, polygraphs, etc. What about political appointees? Or Congressmen?

Berger's been in the system long enough. He should've known better.

[Brian Olewnick]

One of the things I'm wondering about (maybe I've missed it) is exactly what the security arrangements were at the site in question. Were there a guard or two standing over the desk? Video cameras? How does someone actually leave with documents, accidentally or otherwise? If they're being monitored somehow, it would seem to be impossible to get out. If they're not, why on earth not? That would seem to leave open the possibility of someone walking off with info that, conceivably, could have immediate, dire consequences before it was noticed missing.

[lynn]

This has been an ongoing investigation since last October. This is not news. What is news is the sock and to me that "un-named source" crap smacks of Carl Rove and his dirty trick tactics. It's just the right time to turn him loose.

Anybody who remembers Bush's campaign against Ann Richards in Texas knows exactly what I am talking about.

[patricia]

Originally Posted by Monte Smith

So said Bill Clinton: "I think the timing is interesting." So said Dee Dee Myers last night on HARDBALL. "What I find interesting is the timing." And that loathsome sister of Barney Frank, Ann Lewis, former mouthpiece for Hillary Clinton, also had it on her cue cards. "The timing is interesting."

Yes, the timing is always interesting. The timing would have been even more interesting if the time was next week and the Dem convention was in progress. If there are Ominous Forces behind this story, why didn't they wait until next week, when the timing would have been blockbuster?

Or, if your mind really turns toward the hidden scheme, why suspect only the one party? Isn't it *interesting* that these revelations about Sandy Berger--undisputed revelations--come out into the light only when John Kerry is on vacation and secluded from press scrutiny? Gosh!

And patricia, really. You have done nothing on this thread except to try to change the subject. I don't understand this, since it is an unworthy trick, one that I would be too embarrassed to attempt--given that every poster and his dog would call me on it if I tried.

Faced with the prospect of an American security official stuffing documents in his trousers, you've diverted us to the justness of the Iraq War, "un-named sources," the Afghan drug trade, George Tenet, the economic recovery, and now the safety of Iraqi women. All fine topics, but none of them germaine to Sandy Berger.

Of course not, Monte. Everybody is MUCH more concerned about Sandy Berger's copies of archived material than they are with actual people's lives being at risk. You, of course, always stay on topic, so, I'll leave you to it. BE more concerned about the bobbing and weaving of politicial mis-steps and infractions of library rules, when people are dying, because your sanctimonious twits, the Bush gang, are above it all. "At least Saddam is gone". Yeah. Right.

My apologies. I removed any suggestion of any possible link to other scandals which may or may not matter to you, since Sandy Berger's socks and their possible contents are being discussed.

[Pete C]

I don't know why, but this thread title keeps reminding me of "Bette Davis Eyes."