Sandy Berger displayed truly awful security in the handling of sensitive documents. I hope this is just very poor document handling by the one man in the Clinton administration who should have known better. I really hope this is not an amateur attempt to cover up something embarrassing or criminal.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Berger's lawyer is using "my client was looking at thousands of documents and got confused" defense. How one walks out of the National Archives with highly classified materials, and then, according to CNN at least, discards them "accidentally," is alarming to say the least. (I couldn't get a peanut butter sandwich IN to the archives, much less Clinton-era files out of the place.)
I think the ultimate litmus test for this to break into the domain of "scandal" (by nature ephemeral and well-timed before the Kerry coronation) is if Berger is indeed proven to have smuggled documents out in his SOCKS. Try that, Condoleeza!
A. Cathcart (my first posting to your forum)
Adam, great to hear from you. We expect a full report on the new job once school starts.
As someone who originated from the military side of the house, it's always angered me that there were three standards by which violations of security classifications were judged - military, civilian, and political. I would've gone to jail for what Berger did, no questions asked, but it remains to be seen that anything substantial will happen to him.
As for scandal, to me, this looks more like a case of self-inflicted political gunshot wound, and you just can't get any sympathy from me if you're trying to play as a professional. As it is, he probably lost the SecDef spot in a Kerry cabinet, but can you imagine the damage he could have done if the story broke on the fourth day of the convention? In what promises to be a lack-luster round of political conventions, the only real story could have been that one candidate's advisor on national security had just violated national security. Off to political exile for him.
Post a Comment