So the Sandy Berger story is all over the news -- even though it supposedly happened a year ago. Some unnamed archives staffer supposedly saw Berger stuffing documents in his socks, for crying out loud -- if anyone actually saw this, why didn't they stop him? So maybe this is the crime of the century ( but it seems odd that the FBI has never actually interviewed Berger even though they have been "investigating" this security breach for a year) but it reminds me of another "troopergate" -type of story, where some underling supposedly witnessed a high profile Democrat doing something illegal. His lawyer told CNN that Berger inadvertantly shuffled memos into his portfolio last July when he was reviewing documents for possibe release to the 911 commission (apparently, returned after he was told last October to look for them), and that he also knowingly jotted down some notes and took these with him for his 911 commission testimony. Walking out with the documents was illegal, though leaving with the notes was not.
There have been a lot of questions raised about why this story is everywhere all of a sudden.
One of the items likely coming in the 911 commission report on Thursday will be some sharp criticism of the Bush White House for withholding several thousands of documents from the commission until pushed to release them. Now the White House can imply that Berger stole documents showing he and Clinton were to blame for 911.
UPDATE -- And let's not forget that the Plame inditments may be coming down soon. With Bergen now also under investigation by a grand jury, the "moral equivalence" argument can be made, so that the Plame leaker becomes somehow equivalent to Bergen.
No comments:
Post a Comment