Inspector General:Berger Stole Documents

I am wondering why this is new news? Berger has already been charged and fined as he should have been. This is just a released report about it.

Quote:

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

Officials told The Associated Press at the time of the thefts that the documents were highly classified and 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 and seaports.

source

0 Replies

revel wrote:

I am wondering why this is new news? Berger has already been charged and fined as he should have been. This is just a released report about it.

Not the news per se but since Associated Press obtained this first under a Freedom of Information Act request they delivere it firts ... to its subscribing media.

0 Replies

revel wrote:

I am wondering why this is new news? Berger has already been charged and fined as he should have been. This is just a released report about it.

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

Officials told The Associated Press at the time of the thefts that the documents were highly classified and 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 and seaports.

source

The full report just came out, & it was news to me.

0 Replies

LoneStarMadam wrote:

The full report just came out, & it was news to me.

I suppose, that those documents are new to most.

However, that doesn't change the fact that it is old news, Berger had been charged and fined some time ago ... ...

You can make a lot more threads by posting all and every document whic is published due a Freedom of Information Act request, LSM.

0 Replies

SANDY BERGER EXPOSED

Sandy "Pants" Berger is back in the news. It turns out the former National Security Adviser during the Clinton Administration was busy after his little visit to the National Archives. In fact, immediately following his five-finger discount routine, he hid classified documents under a construction trailer. Sounds like an honest mistake to me. So what punishment did Berger face for his little escapade?

First, a little history to refresh your memory. Sandy Berger was preparing for his testimony in front of the 9/11 Commission back in 2003...and was reviewing documents at the National Archives. It was during one of those visits that National Archives employees spotted Berger stuffing classified documents into his pants. But now we have more information. According to the Inspector General's report, here's what Sandy did when he rolled out of the National Archives:

"He headed toward a construction area. Mr. Berger looked up and down the street, up into the windows of the Archives and the Department of Justice, and did not see anyone," says the report. Berger then slid the documents under a construction trailer. He came back later to pick them up. Parts of the report were censored to protect national security. Now, as outrageous as all of this sounds, I have two major observations.

One, where is the mainstream media on all of this? If a Republican had done this...we would never hear the end of it. Would the media have let them off the hook so easily? Hardly. Second...and more importantly...what was Sandy Berger up to? What was he hiding? Why go through all of that effort to hide something? Up to this point, we don't know.

What we do know is that Berger was to testify to the 9/11 commission on what the Clinton Administration did or did not know about any links between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda .. among other things.

Does anyone know what was in those documents? There had to be a reason Sandy Berger was stealing top-secret documents and destroying them. We'll probably never know.

0 Replies

Walter Hinteler wrote:

LoneStarMadam wrote:
The full report just came out, & it was news to me.

I suppose, that those documents are new to most.

However, that doesn't change the fact that it is old news, Berger had been charged and fined some time ago ... ...

You can make a lot more threads by posting all and every document whic is published due a Freedom of Information Act request, LSM.

It's enough for me to know that another criminal was charged & fined, though that's pretty puny punishment for someone that stole secret documents. I have no need to know what's in those documents, but I can imagine they were of a nature that would've put the light of what the Clinton admin really did not do to stave off 911.

0 Replies

LoneStarMadam wrote:

It's enough for me to know that another criminal was charged & fined, though that's pretty puny punishment for someone that stole secret documents. I have no need to know what's in those documents, but I can imagine they were of a nature that would've put the light of what the Clinton admin really did not do to stave off 911.

It's refreshing to see someone actually admit that she prefers reaching her conclusion based on random conjecture rather than actual evidence.

0 Replies

joefromchicago wrote:

LoneStarMadam wrote:
It's enough for me to know that another criminal was charged & fined, though that's pretty puny punishment for someone that stole secret documents. I have no need to know what's in those documents, but I can imagine they were of a nature that would've put the light of what the Clinton admin really did not do to stave off 911.

It's refreshing to see someone actually admit that she prefers reaching her conclusion based on random conjecture rather than actual evidence.

You are so cute, but you really need to get a clue.

0 Replies

This is new news because while Berger plead guilty to unlawfully removing and retaining classified documents, and fined $50,000 and 100 hours of community service, I believe his prior position was it was all an accident.

The new report indicates Berger intentionally took, then hid, then later retrieved those documents. Once he knew he had been caught, he destroyed 3 of the 4 documents by cutting them up and putting them in the trash.

It's also interesting to note that National Archive officials were tracking documents given to him because of suspicions raised from earlier Berger visits where they suspected he had stolen documents.

0 Replies

joefromchicago wrote:

It's refreshing to see someone actually admit that she prefers reaching her conclusion based on random conjecture rather than actual evidence.

LoneStarMadam wrote:

You are so cute, ....

Uh-oh ... another conclusion not based on actual evidence. Laughing

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

joefromchicago wrote:
It's refreshing to see someone actually admit that she prefers reaching her conclusion based on random conjecture rather than actual evidence.

LoneStarMadam wrote:
You are so cute, ....

Uh-oh ... another conclusion not based on actual evidence.

Yet nevertheless accurate. Even a stopped clock, after all, is right twice a day.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

joefromchicago wrote:
It's refreshing to see someone actually admit that she prefers reaching her conclusion based on random conjecture rather than actual evidence.

LoneStarMadam wrote:
You are so cute, ....

Uh-oh ... another conclusion not based on actual evidence.

I'm from the old school, benefit of the doubt & all that. Embarrassed

:wink:

0 Replies

Good thing for Sandy Bergler that he didn't work for a Republican. He would be in prison by now. Instead, it is simply a matter of sloppy paperwork and an inadvertant mistake. After all, we all could easily go stuff FBI files into our underwear by accident without even realizing it. We know too that he had no ill intent because he worked for Bill Clinton, who was totally innocent of doing anything wrong in regard to preventing 911, that Clinton was totally immersed in doing his job 24/7 while in office, and there would certainly be no possibility whatsoever that any of his people would attempt to intentionally remove or alter documents for the 911 Commission investigation.

0 Replies

Yep, they were werkin fer the amurkin peeple, all innocent & aboveboard, yessiree-bob.
Just what is so important do you reackon that Burgler didn't want the 911 commission to know. hmmmm

0 Replies

But Lonestar, I thought the Republicans was the party of corruption. This has me thoroughly confused now.

0 Replies

Liberal hypocricy, okie, simple as that.

0 Replies

Yep, Sandy Bergler was just an innocent, unorganized guy just being sloppy. It was just acccidental he stuffed the stuff in his pants or underwear, then hid it, and shredded some. Isn't that great spin. They apparently have no shame whatsoever.

Now, I'm liking the spin where if Joseph Wilson is asked questions under oath in Fitzgerald's Libby / Valerie Plame case, it is "harrassment." Don't you love that one? These people amaze me. They say this stuff with a straight face. It sounds like a joke, but they actually profess to be serious about it. I know they think the public is basically stupid, and as long as the mainstream media plays along with them, most people are in the dark.

0 Replies

They believe their own spin, their own lies, because they are sooo superior & know better what's best for everyone. They don't believe in individuality....except in criminal activity & then they certainly believe in individuality, their innocence, no matter what.

0 Replies

As you hear more about this, it gets more bizarre. Berger hijacked the papers, got them through a construction fence, then placed them under a construction trailer, later shredded or thrown away. Sounds like more than sloppiness, and it is totally logical Berger was hiding something, very likely documents or notes on documents indicating the administration did nothing to institute the recommended measures following a near terrorist hit by Al Qaeda in 1999, except for an alert security or customs agent, was it in Seattle.

The Clinton defenders at the time just called it sloppiness. That has to be one of the most elaborate cases of sloppiness ever contrived. If this was a Republican administration, there would be Newsweek article with a bloody cover of 911, asking the question, does the previous administration have blood on its hands by not instituting measures that might have prevented 911? There would be a barrage discussing what was Berger trying to hide, and there would be TV specials, articles, and books written about this. Another case of media bias, this story reported, but nothing more, no nothing. They guy gets a slap on the wrist, thats all, and if Hillary is elected, he may get another job.

0 Replies

Inspector General:Berger Stole Documents

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know