OK, so we are learning more and more about the whole Sandy the HamBergler affair, you know, the one were a former Clinton aide purposely and willfully BROKE THE LAW by stealing documents from the National Archives and altering them, another federal offense. And, as in the case of most Clintonistas who do heinous crimes, there is little beyond a slap on the wrist. Sandy Docs in My Socks just got a suspension (not a revokation) of his security clearance and a paltry fine that he can pay off with a one minute speech, given his speaking engagements.
What is more heinous is the context of this perfidy. This was a document detailing the responses to terror that the Clintons had. According to the Washington Times, now we know that Berger didn't just clandestinely sneak around with the docs, but that he had a plan where he snuck the docs out and hid them under a construction trailer to come back later. This was not, as the Clinton kool aid drinkers say, just a case of a guy working hard and getting sloppy, not thinking; whatever. This was a premeditated theft. This was an attempt to cover the bungling of the Clinton White House, to try to create the myth of a positive legacy of one of the most emptyheaded and do nothing administrations in history. Aside from Lewinsky, what do people say about Clinton? Hillary's wife? That's about it. Here is what we now know not only about the event, but also about the bungling of the folks at the National Archive. Of course, who can blame them? I mean, you see a Clinton official breaking rules, are you going to tell on them? You might get Vince Fostered or Travel Officed:
employees saw him bending down and fiddling with something white, which could have been paper, around his ankle, however archives employees didn't feel at the time there was enough information to confront someone of [Burglar]'s stature. Brachfeld reported that on one visit [Burglar] took a break to go outside without an escort. In total during this visit he removed four documents. Mr. [Burglar] said he placed the documents under a trailer in an accessible construction area outside the main archives building.
Yes, folks, this really does sound like an honest mistake, doesn't it? I mean, sneaking out with documents....he just accidently jammed four different documents in his pants and accidently dropped them under a construction trailer, and oh yeah, he accidently came back later, to alter them, shredding some and pasting in other information...yep, it was all a big accident. Bull****!
Mr. Berger claims he made an honest (um, you are a Clinton official, so how do you know the definition of that word) mistake when he stole, er um....misplaced in his britches and socks the documents. He claims all he was doing was trying to aid the work of the 9/11 commission. Well, he might be right, because that joke of a commission basically whitewashed most of Clinton's bungling in the arena of dealing with terrorism, thanks in no small part to people like Bin Veniste and Gorelick being on the commission, two Clinton cronies. So, maybe Bergler is telling the truth in this matter, in that the true work of the 9/11 commission wasn't to find out what happened, but to paint it for Bubba's legacy. Hmm...
Mr. Berger stole and altered documents dealing with the response to the Millenium Threat in 2000. What was in those docs? Nothing earth shattering, the Clintonistas say? Well, then why won't the Clinton Library release all known original copies and versions of the document when asked?
Why hasn't the inspector general been going after Bergler? Hmmm? Well, it appears there are some Clinton holdovers in the IG area, as Mark Levin found out in dealing with them. Here is Levin's comments from over at National Review Online:
Landmark Legal Foundation , of which I am president, had used the Freedom of Information Act to seek all versions/copies of the documents Berger had stolen from the government. Our request is still pending with President Clinton's office. (Yes, he gets to decide about their release during a 12-year period from the time he left office, then certain agencies get to decide, and so forth.) The general counsel to the Inspector Counsel of the National Archives contacted me and asked if we would agree to the release of this report in lieu of securing notes taken by the IG's staff, which he represented were of no real significance. Well, considering the protracted process the government has set up to avoid releasing most of this information, Landmark agreed. We were to receive the report simultaneous with the media.
Apparently the IG's office released the Berger report to the media before providing a copy to Landmark, and released it only a few days before Christmas. Maybe we'll revisit our agreement with the IG's office and go back for the notes.
Never trust the government to do the right thing, Mark, you should know that. CYA baby, CYA.
Seriously, folks, why won't the Clinton Library and Whorehouse release these documents? I mean, if as Sandy Bergler's lawyers say, that the 9/11 Commission missed nothing by not having these documents and they are not earthshattering or damaging, then why not release them? The answer is in what the documents detail. Evidently, the document was prepared by Richard Clarke, back when he wans't just a dissapointed office seeker out for revenge. These documents detail who America just got lucky thanks to a suspicious customs agent, not through any big thing Clinton did. This document is purported to illustrate how lax things were under Clinton and the flip attitudes of staff about terrorism. But really, nothing to see here.
And some people want to bring these sacks of garbage back to the White House? Talk about a culture of corruption!
More info on Berglergate:
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/12/20/171945.shtml?s=ic
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/20/AR2006122001968.html
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Yjg3YTQ5OGE5MGU5ODEyNzlkMDJhZjVhMDFkZWI1YjA=
