Comments on: Outrageous Berger http://www.intheagora.com/archives/2005/04/outrageous_berger/?source=rss current events, culture, faith, science and more Sat, 20 Mar 2010 05:40:35 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2 hourly 1 By: Anonymous http://www.intheagora.com/archives/2005/04/outrageous_berger/comment-page-1/#comment-7814 Anonymous Fri, 01 Apr 2005 22:58:41 +0000 http://intheagora.com/2005/04/outrageous_berger.html#comment-7814 The judge does not have to accept such a sweet deal. The judge does not have to accept such a sweet deal.

]]> By: Expertise's Politics and Sports Blog http://www.intheagora.com/archives/2005/04/outrageous_berger/comment-page-1/#comment-7815 Expertise's Politics and Sports Blog Fri, 01 Apr 2005 18:39:50 +0000 http://intheagora.com/2005/04/outrageous_berger.html#comment-7815 <strong>Washington Post: Berger shredded documents.</strong> 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... 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…

]]> By: Nash http://www.intheagora.com/archives/2005/04/outrageous_berger/comment-page-1/#comment-7813 Nash Fri, 01 Apr 2005 17:43:52 +0000 http://intheagora.com/2005/04/outrageous_berger.html#comment-7813 "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. “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.

]]> By: Eric Seymour http://www.intheagora.com/archives/2005/04/outrageous_berger/comment-page-1/#comment-7812 Eric Seymour Fri, 01 Apr 2005 17:33:31 +0000 http://intheagora.com/2005/04/outrageous_berger.html#comment-7812 Balta, paragraph #9 from the WaPo article Josh links: <i>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> 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. 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.

]]> By: Balta http://www.intheagora.com/archives/2005/04/outrageous_berger/comment-page-1/#comment-7811 Balta Fri, 01 Apr 2005 17:07:28 +0000 http://intheagora.com/2005/04/outrageous_berger.html#comment-7811 I think <a href="http://yglesias.typepad.com/matthew/2005/04/sandy_berger.html" rel="nofollow">Yglesias</a> 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." 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.”

]]> By: Aaron http://www.intheagora.com/archives/2005/04/outrageous_berger/comment-page-1/#comment-7810 Aaron Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:41:28 +0000 http://intheagora.com/2005/04/outrageous_berger.html#comment-7810 "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. “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.

]]> By: van http://www.intheagora.com/archives/2005/04/outrageous_berger/comment-page-1/#comment-7809 van Fri, 01 Apr 2005 13:49:17 +0000 http://intheagora.com/2005/04/outrageous_berger.html#comment-7809 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. 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.

]]>