Clinton & Kerry's Advisor in Cover Up
Find a Conversation
| Mon, 07-19-2004 - 11:39pm |
Sandy Berger, Clinton Sec Advisor & Kerry Campaign Advisor Under Investigation
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040720/D83U6TIO0.html
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Clinton's national security adviser, Sandy Berger, is the focus of a Justice Department 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, 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.
Berger and his lawyer said Monday night he knowingly removed handwritten notes he had made while reading classified anti-terror documents at the archives by sticking them in his jacket and pants. He also inadvertently took copies of actual classified documents in a leather portfolio, they said.
"I deeply regret the sloppiness involved, but I had no intention of withholding documents from the commission, and to the contrary, to my knowledge, every document requested by the commission from the Clinton administration was produced," Berger said in a statement to the AP.
Lanny Breuer, one of Berger's attorneys, said his client has offered to cooperate fully with the investigation but had not yet been interviewed by the FBI or prosecutors. Berger has been told he is the subject of the criminal investigation, Breuer said.
Berger served as Clinton's national security adviser for all of the president's second term and most recently has been informally advising Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry. Clinton asked Berger last year to review and select the administration documents that would be turned over to the commission.
The FBI searches of Berger's home and office occurred after National Archives employees told agents they believed they saw Berger place documents in his clothing while reading sensitive Clinton administration papers and that some documents were then noticed missing, officials said.
When asked, Berger said he returned some classified documents that he found in his office and all of the handwritten notes he had taken from the secure room, but could not locate two or three copies of the highly classified millennium terror report.
"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.
Breuer said Berger believed he was looking at copies of the classified documents, not originals.
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," Breuer said.
Government and congressional officials familiar with the investigation, who spoke only on condition of anonymity because the probe involves classified materials, said the investigation remains active and no decision has been made on whether Berger should face criminal charges.
The officials said the missing 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 to sea ports.
Berger testified at one of the commission's public hearings about the Clinton administration's approach to fighting terrorism. The former president answered the panel's questions at a private meeting.
The former national security adviser himself had ordered his anti-terror czar Richard Clarke in early 2000 to write the after-action report and has spoken publicly about how the review brought to the forefront the realization that al-Qaida had reached America's shores and required more attention.
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.
The missing documents involve two or three draft versions of the report as it was evolving and being refined by the Clinton administration, officials and lawyers say. The Archives is believed to have copies of some of the missing documents.
In the FBI search of his office, Berger also was found in possession of a small number of classified note cards containing his handwritten notes from the Middle East peace talks during the 1990s, but those are not a focus of the current criminal probe, officials and lawyers said.
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 Archives staff specially marked the documents and when the new copy and others disappeared, Archives officials called Clinton attorney Bruce Lindsey to report the disappearance.
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.
He retained counsel, and in January the FBI executed search warrants of a safe at Berger's home as well as his business office where he found some of the documents. Agents also failed to locate the missing documents.
Justice Department officials have told the Sept. 11 commission of the Berger incident and the nature of the documents in case commissioners wanted more information, officials said. The commission is expected to release its final report Thursday.
Congressional intelligence committees, however, have not been formally notified.
"The House Intelligence Committee has not been informed on the loss or theft of any classified intelligence information from the Archives, but we will follow up and get the information that is appropriate for the committee to have," the committee said Monday in a statement. "And if it has occurred, we should be informed. If there has been delay in getting the information to the committee we need to know why."
Berger is the second high-level Clinton-era official to face controversy over taking classified information home.
Former CIA Director John Deutch was pardoned by Clinton just hours before Clinton left office in 2001 for taking home classified information and keeping it on unsecured computers at his home during his time at the CIA and Pentagon. Deutch was about to enter into a plea agreement for a misdemeanor charge of mishandling government secrets when the pardon was granted.
Renee ~~~
Edited 7/20/2004 12:22 am ET ET by cl-wrhen

Pages
Much Ado About Little
The GOP's focus on Sandy Berger may have deflected some attention from the 9/11 report. But the commission's findings are still a setback for BushWEB-EXCLUSIVE COMMENTARY
By Eleanor Clift
Newsweek
- The House and Senate leadership doesn't have enough time to take up the 9/11 commission's recommendations about overhauling the nation's terror fighting network until next year, but the House Government Reform Committee can find the time to squeeze in an investigation of Sandy Berger before the election.
Republicans are acting like Berger is the worst threat to national security since Julius Rosenberg. You'd think Berger was charged with passing nuclear secrets to Iran. He is guilty of removing copies of classified documents from the National Archives—and of serving in the Clinton White House as national-security adviser, which is enough to re-activate the right-wing scandal machine.
This is much ado about very little. "Between jaywalking and Julius Rosenberg, this is closer to jaywalking," says a Senate aide on the Republican side.
This is not to apologize for what Berger did. He showed incredibly poor judgment in his handling of sensitive material, even if it was inadvertent, as he claims. He magnified his misjudgment by continuing to advise the Kerry campaign on foreign policy while he was under investigation by the Justice Department for a security breach. Did he really think that in today's partisan climate, with the two parties gearing up for the nastiest battle ever, his little imbroglio could be kept secret?
In the White House, Berger was known as a worrier with his antennae tuned to potential political problems. As far back as January, Berger alerted former White House press secretary Joe Lockhart that his damage-control services might be needed. By keeping the Kerry campaign in the dark, Berger wasn't thinking about the candidate. In a classic Washington case of hubris overcoming judgment, he was looking to protect his berth in a Kerry administration.
Still, Republicans should beware of overreaching. Berger didn't remove any original documents or do anything to imperil national security. The originals of everything he examined are safely stored at the archives. "This is the national-security equivalent of the Gary Condit story," says a Senate staffer, recalling the media frenzy over the California congressman's relationship with a missing intern in the months before 9/11. While the press chased Condit, implying he was a murderer, Osama bin Laden put the finishing touches on his audacious plan to attack America.
The timing of the Berger leak blunted the impact of the 9/11 commission report. "Instead of getting a straight right hand to Bush, it's a glancing blow," says Lockhart. The commission found no collaborative relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda. It was Iran—not Iraq—that gave aid and comfort to Al Qaeda. Iran allowed some of the 9/11 hijackers to pass through their territory on their way from Afghanistan to Saudi Arabia without having their passports stamped, smoothing their entry into the United States without arousing suspicion.
The commission's findings could be devastating for Bush's re-election campaign. Bush embraced the findings about Iran as vindication for citing Iran as part of the axis of evil. But Bush's credibility is damaged. The 9/11 commission report raises the question: did we invade the wrong country? The late-night talk shows are in synch with the zeitgeist of the country, and they went to the heart of the matter with a joke. Did we go to war over a typo?
With American deaths in Iraq reaching 900, more people are questioning the justification for the war. Did invading Iraq make us safer? The November election will turn on the answer to that question. Bush says he took the fight to Iraq so we could fight terrorists over there and not here at home, yet he warns us that a catastrophic attack on the homeland is likely between now and November. Which is it?
Kerry goes to Boston next week in a stronger position than any recent Democratic challenger. The party is united in its determination to beat Bush, and liberals and New Democrats alike are delighted that John Edwards is on the ticket. Yet Kerry might as well be emerging from a cocoon when he takes the stage to accept the nomination on Thursday night. For all the millions he's raised and the countless campaign trips, he hasn't said anything memorable enough or significant enough to enter the public consciousness.
If the American people decide to fire Bush, will they hire Kerry? He's got to show he's strong enough, that he can connect enough to the American people, and that he has a real plan—a vision—for where he would take the country. "He has to nail the speech, and that's it," says Lockhart.
Bush's job is far more difficult than Kerry's. People already know Bush, and at this late stage, he has yet to lay out an agenda for another four years. It is reminiscent of his father who, after his war victory declined in significance, had no vision to offer the country. Bush goes into the fall with the centerpiece of his campaign in disarray. Where he once exulted in being the "war president," Bush now says he wants to be the "peace president."
Bush caught a break this week with the Berger revelations, but Democrats are on the march. As a Senate Democrat put it, "If we can't beat Bush and Cheney after all this, we don't deserve to exist as a party."
Guess what Renee?
Elaine
<>
Because the average American (like me) is turning to the internet for their information due to the fact that the mainstream media is liberally biased (although they deny it--they just cannot see their bias). They are finally understanding that they cannot fool everyone ALL of the time.
Hey Cekurs!!!!!!!!
Welcome back to the board!!!
Miffy - Co-CL For The Politics Today Board
This does not ring true.
Elaine
Elaine
Thanks Metrochick.
It is if you want to get it out before the 9/11 Report.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/best/?id=110005397
<Jonah Goldberg fingers one suspect, Lanny Davis, a former special counsel to President Clinton:
Goldberg quotes an April 12, 1999, article by the Washington Post's media reporter, Howard Kurtz:
Renee ~~~
Welcome back! It's good to see you posting here again.
Renee ~~~
<<"delicious" Renee?
Renee ~~~
Pages