http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~53~2284437,00.html interesting. politics as usual. conveniently leaked sensationalist story that will do nothing in the end. i consider the whole thing a wash. pro-kerry people will agree it was an accident and point at the convenient timing of the leak. pro-bush people will scream how crooked and bad the dems are, and say the story was being covered up by a liberal media bias. so, anyway, what're y'all's thoughts?
It's a 9 month old story. Somehow it comes up again a day before the 911 report and a week before the DNC convention.
Berger was an idiot to snatch those papers and then claim "sloppiness." Totally unethical. However, the timing of this sounds fishy to me too. Why is this just NOW coming out? The political games we are continuing to see are very entertaining. Both parties are losing out, however, and making Nader look like a shining star. I'm still sticking with my mantra though: "anyone but Bush, anyone but Bush"
Heh, soon they'll claim it was a "paper malfunction." But seriously, what's this guy doing with classified terrorism documents? It's not something you take home at night, it's top secret government files. Does anybody know what kind of information was contained in the documents? If not, they should, because this couldn't have been an accident. Whatever was on those papers must have been something he didn't want anybody to know about.
This is from the same guy that thinks its okay for Bush's administration to hold onto the torture videos?
The story was out 9 months ago. 6 months ago the FBI searched Berger's place. From what they said in the news 6 months ago, he was cleared of doing anything illegal (although he may have broken technical rules regarding the library procedures). The lastest is that the Justice Dept has opened up a criminal investigation of Berger.
All of this reminds me of the Iran-Contra fiasco back in the 80s when Ollie North was accused of sneaking out secret documents by putting them in the panties of his secretary.
That was Grievous Angel. I said I'd believe the tapes exist when I see them. I'm not going to take some journalist's word that the government is holding tapes when there he has no proof except a claim.
i'd never heard about this before it came out again. if they're pointing out a new investigation of the man, then that WOULD make it newsworthy, i suppose. i'm also hearing a lot of noise about different news agencies claiming the story was being covered up by other news agencies. i'm sorry i'm not more specific, i was dozing on the couch at the time.
Yeah I'm the same way. I only watch the news in between The Daily Show, Tough Crown, Inuyasha and Lupin the Third. Can't have real life interfereing with my regularly scheduled programming.
I doubt it. First off, the papers in question were only COPIES. The originals were still in the archives. If he wanted to prevent people from seeing them, he would have taken the ORIGINALS, as well, no? Secondly, the 9/11 commission (presumably the people the documents were being "hidden from") claims that it received EVERYTHING they requested from the archives. The only people who didn't fully cooperate would have been the White House and the VP. Supposedly, Sandy Berger had a long history of being sloppy with paperwork. His desk in the Clinton White House was allegedly piled high with so much shit that you couldn't see him sitting there! While this doesn't excuse his stupid mistake, it certainly might explain it. This story is months old, and if there was any grounds for criminal charges against Berger, they would certainly have been filed by now. The timing of the emergence of this story (with no new developments in the case to otherwise explain it) seems to be pure political diversion. With the 9/11 report and the DNC convention coming up, Bush needs anything he can get to shift the media focus this week.
here's a new Washington Post story, for those interested. i like the way they're trying to straddle the line here. the absentminded perfessor claim still works even under these circumstances. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A4189-2004Jul21?language=printer
