WASHINGTON —
A group of House Republicans called Wednesday for a congressional investigation into the improper handling of classified documents by President Clinton's national security adviser, Sandy Berger.
Berger admitted last year that he deliberately took classified documents out of the National Archives in 2003 and destroyed some of them at his office. He pleaded guilty in federal court to one charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material and was fined $50,000.
And who says that the Republican won't hash out old news to try to win!
I mean, he pleaded guilty in 2003!
3 Years ago!
It's it funny how it just becomes news again...
Refresh people's memories weeks befor the election.
Jamie
Sad!
Truely sad!
All Politicans are corrupt!
Can't load the page. Can't find it on other news sites. Saw it on Drudge, but that's a drive-by media site. But that report says the investigation has nothing to do with the guilty plea, rather, if documents more directly relating to Clinton's anti-terrorism actions were taken.
To me, it doesn't matter what the "reason" was, they have had 3 years to do this and yet they wait until weeks until an election?
It's my opinion that it's dirty politics, or I should say politics as normal...
Also, as a disclaimer, I think the democrats and republicans both are playing dirty these days.
It's past time for a 3rd party to give it a try.
Jamie
From now on, I am spelling democrat and republican with a lowercase letter.
They don't deserve the uppercase.
:)
That is my point.
They have had 3 years, and yet, it comes out NOW.
You see, I am with you guys in that we need to know what he took and why, but as
with most everything in Washington, because it comes out in an election cycle, and it seems to be dirty politics, then I can only presume that we won't find out the what and why's.
If they really wanted to know the what and why's they would have asked 3 years ago.
Well since, the Justice department was done in 2005, and Sandy Berger was sentenced under a plea deal I would say that I still have to wonder why it took them over a year to bring this letter to light.
Oh I forgot, I know the reason..
Dirty politics...
It's not that I don't think we should know, the point of my post was I hate it when either side plays dirty politics..
And THAT is what they are doing, they aren't looking for the truth.
Jamie, it's hard to argue that you are not correct.
You are.
However we do not live in a perfect world where everyone plays by the rules, especially in politics.
You are right to hate it.
But, being realistic, our political system and politicians did not get the way they are overnight.
It took a couple of hundred years and American style politics are an accurate reflection of our sinful human nature.
Keep hoping and working for the best, but play the hand that is dealt when it comes to voting choices.:godisgood:
Considering that Scooter Libby is still facing perjury and obstruction of justice charges, and a possible prison term, three years after the Plame affair, (and after the true facts in the matter are now known), a cynic might suspect that the Libby case is being drawn out indefinately for political purposes. Or at least till the elections are over.
Btw, Berger will be eligible to have his security clearance reinstated in 2008.
As for what was in the documents that Berger destroyed, we know this much -
-At the time of the 9-11 commision hearings, Bill Clinton appointed Berger to assess all the documents relevant to Clinton's handling of security measures leading up the the 9-11 attacks.
- The papers that Berger took were copies of an 'After Action Report' on the administration's handling of the millennium plot of 1999-2000. He took and destroyed multiple copies of this report, over the course of several days.
- The report was the result of a review done by Richard Clarke, then the White House counterterrorism chief, of efforts by the Clinton administration to disrupt terrorist plots at the turn of the year 2000. Clarke criticised the handling of the millennium plot in his book, 'Against All Enemies'. And in a note to Berger, Clarke concluded that the administrations attempts at disrupting Al Qaeda "have not put too much of a dent" into Bin Ladin's network. He also feared that sleeper cells had been established in the United States.
Possibly Berger was trying to keep this report, and the associated notes, out of the hands of the Commission. If so, he was not able to take all copies that were in existance, because the Commission got them anyway.
Drawn out by whom? Are you accusing Patrick Fitzgerald, appointed by a Republican administration (Deputy Attorney General under Ashcroft) to investigate this, of anti-Republican partisan politics? Compare his investigation to Kenneth "Leaky" Starr's.
Your accusation seems to have no merit as there was sufficient evidence to obtain an indictment. If anything, I'd bet that the trial or plea bargain, as well as the full report, has been postponed until after the election to boost the party in power's chances of staying in power.
Didn't accuse Fitzgerald of anything. Someone here asserted that it was dirty politics for Congress to investigate a crime occuring three years ago. I only suggested that three years is not so long ago, considering that Libby is still defending himself, after three years, from charges that were brought in response to politically-motivated yowling by Wilson and his friends in the press.