Outrageous Berger
Here at ITA there is a genre of blogging we generally try to avoid. It’s called “PASWO,” or “point at something with outrage.” In spite of our aversion to it that’s precisely what I intend to do in this post, but for good reason.
In an effort to assess what led to the Sept. 11 attacks, the government – through congressional legislation and the signature of President George W. Bush – created the 9-11 Commission. In the face of moutning danger of more terrosim and attacks, the commission’s work was vital to national security and our ability to learn from prior mistakes. So when former national security adviser Sandy Berger took classified material from the National Archives relating to the Clinton administration’s preparation, it was no small matter. Now that Berger has plead guilty, the details of the events deserve close attention, so I blockquote liberally:
The terms of Berger’s agreement required him to acknowledge to the Justice Department the circumstances of the episode. Rather than misplacing or unintentionally throwing away three of the five copies he took from the archives, as the former national security adviser earlier maintained, he shredded them with a pair of scissors late one evening at the downtown offices of his international consulting business.
The document, written by former National Security Council terrorism expert Richard A. Clarke, was an “after-action review” prepared in early 2000 detailing the administration’s actions to thwart terrorist attacks during the millennium celebration. It contained considerable discussion about the administration’s awareness of the rising threat of attacks on U.S. soil. . . .
Berger’s archives visit occurred as he was reviewing materials as a designated representative of the Clinton administration to the national commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The question of what Clinton knew and did about the emerging al Qaeda threat before leaving office in January 2001 was acutely sensitive, as suggested by Berger’s determination to spend hours poring over the Clarke report before his testimony.
Berger stole, destroyed, and then lied about classified documents pertaining to vital national security issues as part of a politically motivated coverup. As if this weren’t bad enough, President Clinton laughed when he learned of the despicable crime. In terms of great American scandals, this must surely rank right near the top.
The scandal is made worse by Berger’s puny punishment. He will be sentenced to a misdemeanor carrying a $10,000 fine and a three-year suspension of national security clearance. This does not meet the crime. Can you imagine an “ordinary” citizen getting the same treatment? He should spend hard time in jail and never have any clearance or public office again. Moreover, Clinton’s pathetic response to the crime should be explained. This is a sad day for the Justice Department and the American rule of law.
Others covering the sad day: The Fearless Critic, Captain’s Quarters, Boortz.com, Outside the Beltway, Bill Hobbs, La Shawn Barber, Kevin Drum, the Cool Blue Blog, skippy the bush, Myopic Zeal, Balance Sheet, and The Hedgehog Report.
Update: See legal analysis above.
7 Responses to “Outrageous Berger”
It is obvious to anyone that Berger was protected from up on high. The party in control will not do anything because they know that someday they will not be in control. Favoritism. It stinks to high heaven, but we voted them into office.
“In terms of great American scandals, this must surely rank right near the top.”
OK, Bush’s justice department is prosecuting this guy, and they offered him a sweet plea bargain. If this were really such a big scandal, why do that?
The Sandy Berger “scandal” has again hit the headlines (anonymously leaked by the same Bush justice dept officals who offered the sweet plea bargain) just as another investigation of White House incompetence/fabrication is being released. Last June it was the 9/11 commission, this week it’s the presidential intelligence commission. It makes me suspect that all this outrage is manufactured.
The politics of distraction have become a favorite tactic of Republicans in the past few years. They no longer deny the White House’s lies and incompetence, they just point with outrage at something distracting (memogate, Schiavogate, the Berger scandal) and yell really loudly.
I think Yglesias asks the question that needs answering before we evaluate whether or not this was a major scandal that harmed national security.
“Berger took five slightly different copies of an after-action report out of the archives and destroyed three of them. I’m seeing two different possible construals of what this means:
* 1. There is an original after-action report out there somewhere, of which X copies exist, each of which is slightly different. Berger took five of the archives home and destroyed three of them.
* 2. There were several slightly different versions of an after-action. Each one was duplicated X times. Berger took five of the duplicates out of the archives and destroyed three of them.
If (2), this is weird, but I think it’s clear that nothing of significance is being covered-up, because if there were it would be reflected in the originals and the White House would just leak it. If (1) is right, then Berger has actually destroyed some unique documents, and for all we know something special about them would be damaging to him or his associates in the Clinton administration. But is it (1) or is it (2)? The reporting seems ambiguous to me.”
Balta, paragraph #9 from the WaPo article Josh links:
Archives officials have said previously that Berger had copies only, and that no original documents were lost. It remains unclear whether Berger knew that, or why he destroyed three versions of a document but left two other versions intact. Officials have said the five versions were largely similar, but contained slight variations as the after-action report moved around different agencies of the executive branch.
I think this is the crux of the matter. Berger may have believed that he was destroying something embarassing to the Clinton Administration. But in any case, it should be easy to see why his actual actions should be strongly punished. At the least, he should never have national security clearance again.
“In terms of great American scandals, this must surely rank right near the top.”
How many April Fools posts are you going to do, anyway?
This one was the funniest. I just love faux outrage, when it’s so OTT as here.
Washington Post: Berger shredded documents.
was going to add this as an update to my previous Berger post, but this was too important to go unseen on my front page. The Washington Post has the inside scoop of Sandy Berger’s criminal act. As part of the plea bargain, Sandy Berger admitted thi…
The judge does not have to accept such a sweet deal.