An IG report released Wednesday discloses that Clinton's former Secretary of Defense, Sandy Berger, actually took 4 Classified documents from the Archives outside and hid them under a construction trailer. He did this during a "break" and admitted retreaving the documents later and taking them to his office. When confronted by the Archive official about the Classified documents, Berger told him it was possible he had accidentally thrown them in the trash. So----he LIED about what he did with them. Berger admitted under oath to what he really did with the documents.

"Mr. Berger said he placed the documents under a trailer in an accessible construction area outside Archives 1 (the main Archives building)."

Berger acknowledged that he later retrieved the documents from the construction area and returned with them to his office.

Berger, with the authorization of former President Clinton, was reviewing National Security Council documents on Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida, Sudan, and related presidential correspondence. The review was to facilitate Berger's impending testimony before the House and Senate intelligence committees."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061220/...er_documents_1

Un-freakin'believable, eh???? Can you imagine the uproar all over the media had this been a former or current Republican Secretary of Defense???? Berger received absolutely nothing as far as punishment....a mere slap on the wrist, if that much. AND what's MORE important: he's NEVER been made to explain to anyone----not to the American public, not to the media, no one----what was in those documents and why he took them and destroyed them.

Okay, conspiracy theorists: here's a LEGITIMATE conspiracy for ya. Have at it!! Frankly, I think Berger and Clinton know EXACTLY what he stole from the Archives and why. And I think they should be made to explain it to the American people. Or put his arse in jail.

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007

Wow...I heard about this a long time ago, things certainly do move a lot slower when the spotlight is on a “D”. Scandals with republicans are plastered all over the MSM until we know who, what, when, where, why and how. I’ve yet to see any mentions of what the stolen documents were about.

Considering how little Clinton did about Osama, al-Qaida, or Sudan is even stranger that the papers were destroyed by his leading ‘reviewer’ on the subject.

It could have possibly said: “The members in your counseling circle think it’d be wise to focus on this Middle East fellow. Stop bombing the people of Serbia, the last time they saw planes dropping bombs on their cities was when the Nazi were doing it.”

__________________
"A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away."

The Solution for Illegal Immigrants (Gray areas discussed throughout the thread)

YEP. Something like that----or worse. Maybe proof of a definite missed opportunity-----or Clinton writing in the margins, "bin Laden not important." It was definitely something very condemning of Clinton and Berger. Otherwise, he wouldn't have risked what he did to steal them and destroy them.

But what is so odd is that here we are in a court case over Lewis Libby and who he said what to whom and in what order. No one was hurt. And yet, Sandy Berger can go into the National Archives, STEAL Classified documents, and NOT have to tell us what it was and why. What he hid and then destroyed might very well have been proof that the Clinton administration was responsible for 9/11. We'll NEVER know. And there is NOT one liberal media outlet who is willing to examine it either. Wonder who made sure the info was released a few days before Christmas while everyone was busy with the Holiday and wouldn't notice???

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007

all public servants who destroy documents should be jailed.

This is simply incorrect. The Berger scandal was all over the news when it happened, when he was convicted, etc.

As for what he stole, it was copies of documents -- not originals. The Archive has said it has an original of everything he took.

As for why he stole it, he said he took them to help him prepare for his upcoming testimony, because he didn't think he'd be able to remember the contents in enough detail. Most classified document reading rooms don't allow you to take notes with you.

You can disbelieve him, but to support a conspiracy theory, you'd have to explain what was in the copy that wasn't in the original. Some people have suggested margin notes by key actors -- but I haven't seen any actual evidence to support that.

Doesn't excuse what he did, of course.

__________________
Man up.

Then yahoo news is giving a Christmas present to the Dem haters: “missing documents”, “classified documents”, “documents” were the only terms used to describe the missing pages.

I would think he’d inform the press concerning that ‘reason’ for his actions. All that was mentioned here was: “he said it was possible he threw them in his office trash.”

__________________
"A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away."

The Solution for Illegal Immigrants (Gray areas discussed throughout the thread)

Maybe that is why the Bush administration are such screwups. They gotta blame somebody other than themselves.

But NOT the copy that Berger destroyed. NOT the copy that obviously had something hand-written in the margins.

[quote="raytri";p="322505"]As for why he stole it, he said he took them to help him prepare for his upcoming testimony, because he didn't think he'd be able to remember the contents in enough detail. Most classified document reading rooms don't allow you to take notes with you.
[quote] Oh come on: doesn't even pass the smell test. He KNEW he was illegal; but he did it anyway. Wanted them pretty bad to risk breaking the law, eh?

[quote="raytri";p="322505"]You can disbelieve him, but to support a conspiracy theory, you'd have to explain what was in the copy that wasn't in the original. Some people have suggested margin notes by key actors -- but I haven't seen any actual evidence to support that.
[quote] Well, no duh----thus the reason he stole them! Why do I need to explain what was on them different from the others???? I didn't steal them!!!That was Berger's responsibility.

Not only doesn't excuse it-----it's unbelievable how he could get away with it like he did. Seriously, Raytri-----if this had been Condi Rice, what do you think would have happened to her? What would YOU have wanted to happen to her????

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007

[quote="JP5";p="322512"] But NOT the copy that Berger destroyed. NOT the copy that obviously had something hand-written in the margins.

[quote="raytri";p="322505"]As for why he stole it, he said he took them to help him prepare for his upcoming testimony, because he didn't think he'd be able to remember the contents in enough detail. Most classified document reading rooms don't allow you to take notes with you.
[quote] Oh come on: doesn't even pass the smell test. He KNEW he was illegal; but he did it anyway. Wanted them pretty bad to risk breaking the law, eh?

[quote="raytri";p="322505"]You can disbelieve him, but to support a conspiracy theory, you'd have to explain what was in the copy that wasn't in the original. Some people have suggested margin notes by key actors -- but I haven't seen any actual evidence to support that.
As much a Condi deserves it. She has thus far remained relatively unscathed. I have a feeling that is going to change soon. You get what you give.

Dems excuses for themselves:

* it was just sloppy accounting.....

* it was his PERSONAL sex life; leave him alone!

* Republicans shouldn't have gotten into our computer files....

* those Classified docs were just copies of more Classified docs

* yeah, I know it doesn't look good, so I won't do it again....

and on and on and on and on.....

Do as I say; not as I do.

One set of standards for Republicans; another one for us.

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007