As always, InstaPundit has a cornucopia of links on the Sandy Berger/stolen documents scandal. From what we know, it does not look good. There is no way that a former National Security Advisor can plead ignorance of the law in this case, and from what we know it appears that this wasn’t an isolated incident:
aid 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 Archive staff specially marked the documents and when the new copy and others disappeared, Archive officials called Clinton attorney Bruce Lindsey to raise concerns.
If that story is true, it means that this couldn’t be said to be a simple, one-time mistake, but a pattern of removing information from the Archives.
Over at Red State, we get some very interesting speculation as to what those documents could contain. Apparently the missing documents are copies of the classified after-action report of the 2000 bombing plots – from what we know of these documents they are highly critical of the artificial “wall” between intelligence and law enforcement created by Clinton Admnistration lawyer and current September 11 Commissioner Jamie Gorelick. The fact that these documents have conveniently seemed to disappear at the hands of Clinton’s former NSA sounds like something out of a Robert Ludlum novel rather than real life – yet it appears that in this case, the truth really is stranger than fiction.
Of course, The New York Times deigned this major story unfit for the front page, instead relegating it to the far wastelands of page A-17. What did they think was front-page news? An article on how untucked shirts are now a fashion statement.
UPDATE: Captain Ed has much more on this scandal. I especially like his name for it – "Trousergate…"
It’s incredible how democrats can act like pirats. They should be jailed…The left is really not ashamed of using illegal strategies.
I’m sure Berger is also the one who destroyed Bush’s military documents. Oh wait, no that can’t be…who did then?
Since you were talking of redstate, I take the liberty to make a few comments here (even though it is not the topic of this particular article, but I don’t know where else to put it…):
1-clarity of the home page could really be improved. You can give them many advices Jay, yours look a lot better and more understandable .
2-the “posting rules”. I remember I had some problems with jayreding.com’s posting rules, as I really found them “anti-debate”. At redstate.org, things are quite different. It’s fully totalitarist!!! Have a look by yourself, but here are the best parts!!!!
“The posting rules for redstate.org are as follows:
No profanity.
No personal attacks.
No harassment or demonization of a particular individual.
No disruptive behavior or off-topic remarks for their own sake.”
Looks really clean…does article 2 and 3 mean that Bin Laden and Saddam will have to be called Mr Bin Laden and Mr Hussein? Article 4 can be tricky, but no objection until now…
“Banning for ideological reasons will take place only in the cases of fundamentally anti-American ideologies. Nazis, Islamists, Communists and racists are unwelcome at redstate.org. Any other person of basic good sense and goodwill, regardless of party, is welcome to participate and hopefully come around to the ideals of Republicanism.
The proprietors of this site are the sole and final judges and enforcers of this policy.
Looks really nice and clean again…it’s republican, but if
one sticks to politness, the debate is possible. Then comes the “clarification”!!
Update [2004-7-12 18:12:59 by tacitus]:
A little clarification is in order. Pursuant to the mission statement, this site is explicitly meant to serve as a conservative and Republican community. Postings, comments, etc., contrary to this purpose fall under the rubric of “disruptive behavior” and will result in banning.
Now it looks more like being a democrat is “a disruptive behavior”…I see no hot debates but only big noddings in the futur of this website…not so interesting then. The only way to know how good your ideas really are is to confront them with those of the opposition. I guess it’s better for your ideas not to be too confronted to others…
“fun fact”: one of the founder explicitely present himself: “He doesn’t like the French”. I don’t know how does that fit with “racists are unwelcome at redstate.org”, but maybe french are not considered as human beings anymore for reps?
My final comment would be that there is only one thing that looks adequate in this website: the title: When you understand how it works, you really think that you are in “THE Red State”, good old USSR!!!
There are so many questions begging to be answered.
1) How could Berger, who was NSA for goodness sakes, make so many errors in the handling of confidential docs? It’s not like the guy wouldn’t know about such protocol…and as Captain Ed and others point out, top secret docs are clearly marked to prevent such errors, and those entrusted with them are given clear instruction on how to treat them…
2) Why the bizarre stuffing of docs in his pockets? This hardly seems professional behavior, and hints that he knew this was wrong…
3) Of course there are the missing docs…again, how could a National Security Advisor handle top secret docs in such a careless way?
4) And what of the content of those missing docs? Ah, yes…that is a big one.
Let’s face it…this whole thing has one big stench…and it leads, like the Wilson scandal, right back to the Kerry Kamp…
Interesting stuff from Debka files:
Islamic extremists and Arab terrorists as well as the Saddam regime prospered unnoticed in the Clinton years. Al Qaeda was allowed to build up in the Balkans a central logistical base for operations in Europe, from which the Hamburg cell later derived back-up for plotting the 9/11 attacks against America.
Hmmm….Berger would know about this…