« Has The Right Conceded Too Much On The Web? | Main | Some First Hand Reporting On Gas Prices »

Will Americans Learn What Sandy Berger Stuffed In His Pants?

In my column at Townhall I write about the call for an investigation to "determine whether any documents were missing from Clinton administration terrorism records, to review security measures for classified documents and to seek testimony from Berger." I also wonder what other documents from the Clinton years might have gone missing.


Comments (45)

Am I missing something?!?!?... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

Am I missing something?!?!? This is the most bizarre thing ever. I guess the republicans assume, apparently correctly, that their supporters are dumber then dirt. I thought this issue was settled a long time ago. Are the Republicans that desperate they have to bring up something that's completely a non-issue but that will some how ring a bell of familiarity with their dumbbell constituency that they hope to get a few dim wit votes out of this? BEEEEZAARRRRRR!!!!

And here you are Lori writing about it as if under some weird hypnotic trance. Matrix material!!!!

After a long investigation, the lead prosecutor Noel Hillman, chief of the Justice Department's public integrity section, stated that Berger only removed classified copies of data stored on hard drives stored in the National Archives, and that no original material was destroyed.

There is no evidence that he intended to destroy originals,' said Mr. Hillman. 'There is no evidence that he did destroy originals. We have objectively and affirmatively confirmed that the contents of all the five documents at issue exist today and were made available to the 9/11 Commission."

From over a year and a half ago....

http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006521

Geez, do you ever follow th... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

Geez, do you ever follow the links? If you did you would read about how Berger's document theft is something that I have written on quite a bit because of my past experience working with sensitive legal documents. It drove me crazy that the theft and destruction of national security documents was swept under the rug.

For goodness sake, you have this guy who stuffed classified documents in his pants and then destroyed them in his office, going on news shows speaking with supposed authority on national security issues. That is what is bizarre. He was all over the news during the 9/11 anniversary speaking out against the ABC movie. He should be under a frickin' rock hiding in shame for stealing and destroying classified documents. I really get animated about this one because I know how seriously I took my job handling documents that were subject to a lawsuit and an FBI investigation. I was not a top secret cleared national security advisor, but I knew how to maintain the integrity of documents. It is inexcusable, but Bill Clinton just laughed it off.

Hey, just for a change, why don't you read the column and you will find out how normal people are punished for stealing documents from the National Archives. Berger got a slap on the wrist and that is inexcusable. I want to know why the matter was swept under the rug.

For all I care this could be held off until after the election. I just want to know what really happened and how many other documents could have been compromised. If you have read me for the past couple of years you would know that this is something I have written on frequently and with great passion. National security is serious business.

<a href="http://www.washing... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

This is what Berger admitted to. I don't think it is okay to sneak docs out of the archive and toss them in the trash. If there was nothing wrong with what he did, then why did he receive any punishment at all? He did have to pay a $50,000 fine. If he was in the right, then he should not have plead guilty.

Here is the deal, he was reviewing copies of documents in the archives. Others would be reviewing those copies as well, I would assumem in preparation for the upcoming hearings. What did he want removed so that others could not see it? Since he didn't let anyone know what he had taken, others could have been reviewing the documents and believe they had seen everything, if they didn't know exactly what he had removed.

What I want to know is if he would go to such lengths to illegally remove documents from the archives, how did he treat documents while he was in the White House, before they made it to the archives. How many documents were destroyed in all those years? If you read what the subject of the proposed investigation would be, it goes beyond the docs that Berger pilfered and extends to other documents related to nat'l security.

Lori, you are trying to tal... (Below threshold)
mesablue:

Lori, you are trying to talk sense to someone who is unable to read more than three words without his brain becoming unwired.

I used to love this blog, now because of thread hijacks by the likes of muirgeo, Lee and his ilk -- I only stop by weekly, if that.

Some house cleaning needs to be done.

I will never retreat from a discussion, but too many posts here have turned into fights between a few idiots and the loyal readers.

It would be one thing if they ever stayed on point and actually said something original, but, it's the same old tired crap over and over.

It is one thing to welcome discourse -- which is what I loved about this blog in the first place (even the Paul/oozer fights) but, it seems to be getting out of hand.

I'd hate to see the idiots win -- Kevin, do your readers a favor and take out the trash once in a while. They can't be generating any more page views; quite the contrary.

Finally we will have answer... (Below threshold)
jp2:

Finally we will have answers from Bergler and our long national nightmare will be over. You are so courageous Lorie. Keep up the good fight of holding government responsible.

Wow! A paralegal! Combine t... (Below threshold)
jp2:

Wow! A paralegal! Combine that with Jay Tea's Xbox war games and it's basically Rumsfeld and Condi.

jp2, at first I was annoyed... (Below threshold)

jp2, at first I was annoyed at your sniping, then I realized that you simply can't do any better. You can't refute Lorie's or my arguments, so you decide to go after us, hoping that if you discredit us personally, you might be able to discredit our arguments.

It's the coward's way, but that's no great surprise.

For the record, though, I don't own an XBox. In fact, I haven't owned a gaming console since an Atari 2600. Like I say, I READ a lot and REMEMBER a lot of the lessons I learn. And every now and then, those who have actually "been there and done that" chime in and let me know when I'm wrong -- but for the most part, affirm that I do know a little of what I speak.

And what little I do know utterly crushes what you know, as you so frequently demonstrate.

Berger is a former National Security Advisor, and he STOLE and DESTROYED classified material during a time of war. That's a textbook definition of espionage. There is speculation that the copies he STOLE and DESTROYED contained handwritten notes that he found cast him and the Clinton administration in a bad light, but we'll never know, because he STOLE and DESTROYED them. (Let's not forget, either, that at that time he was an advisor to the Kerry campaign -- and in line for a top position in a hypothetical Kerry administration.) And as punishment for his actions, he got a (to him) trifling fine and revocation of his security clearance.

Go back and play with your fellow morons, jp2 -- your stupidity has long exhausted its entertainment value.

J.

Fine, jp2, let's play your ... (Below threshold)

Fine, jp2, let's play your little game briefly. You denigrate Lorie's paralegal experience. What are YOUR qualifications to comment on legal affairs? And no, several years of watching The West Wing and Law and Order don't count.

J.

I sure want to see somethin... (Below threshold)
JAT:

I sure want to see something come out of this. I have no doubt that Sandy destroyed classified documents to protect Clinton (both probably). Had that been private citizen Smith - he'd still be in jail. Come on - Clinton sent his boy in to clean up evidence that would point to Clinton. I want to know what they are hiding!

Typical leftie tactic...jus... (Below threshold)

Typical leftie tactic...just start shout inane garbage, call people names and act all snarky.

Put the shoe on the other foot and say it's Condi, I'm sure muirgeo an jp2 (might as well add Lee) would be all up in arms.

"You can't refute Lorie's o... (Below threshold)
jp2:

"You can't refute Lorie's or my arguments, so you decide to go after us, hoping that if you discredit us personally"

"Typical leftie tactic...just start shout inane garbage, call people names and act all snarky."

Please notice I didn't call anyone names - only Sandy Berger.

However - you called me a coward, annoying and stupid.

Hypocrites. (Notice I didn't say stupid hypocrites)

jp2 -- the fact that I was ... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

jp2 -- the fact that I was just a lowly paralegal is the point! Did that one just go over your head? He was National Security Advisor, yet me as a lowly paralegal knew more about the proper handling of sensitive documents than he did. Actually I think he knew plenty, he just had no respect for the rules or the law.

As an aside, John Edwards' wife, Elizabeth Anania (she changed the name to Edwards when he decided to run for Senate) was counsel to one of the parties involved in that litigation and had to follow the procedures we set up when reviewing those documents. We never had a bit of trouble with her or anyone else following the rules. It ain't rocket science -- that is what makes Berger's actions indefensible.

Well, I am certainly curiou... (Below threshold)
DaveD:

Well, I am certainly curious and I don't care how long ago he got hit with a fine. Although it goes without saying, I know if Sandy Berger were a Republican appointment under let's say Reagan or Bush I, muirgeo and jp2 would suddenly feel equally as curious. Come on guys admit it. Am I right???

jp2, STILL waiting to hear ... (Below threshold)

jp2, STILL waiting to hear you cite your so-much-more impressive credentials, after denouncing Lorie's and mine... and note that 1) I never claim to have any, and 2) Lorie was using her LACK of credentials to make a point -- even SHE knew what Sandy "The Pants Burglar" did was highly illegal, with her limited expertise, and would NEVER have done anything like what he did.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'll go back to my XBox... whoops, I don't have one. Then I'll have to skim through my copy of "The Dictionary Of Modern War" once again. There are some interesting things they say about Israel's Merkava tank that I don't quite "get" in comparison to our Abrams, and the Kirov-class Soviet warships are one of my current interests...

J.

Mesablue, I could not agree... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Mesablue, I could not agree more. I hope Lorie, Jay Tea and all pay attention. The lefties are just on site to incite and most fall for the tactic. I too am bored and tired of the same comments from the left loons. Clean the site up.

Count my vote for an ignore... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

Count my vote for an ignore button to put j2p, muirgeo, and Lee in a long time out. That'll will stop the hijacking around here.

Sandy Berger is going to jail after the coming election. He can use his felonious skill to hide a shiv in his pants in an attempt to stay alive when he leaves that 3 x 6 cell each day.

Oh come on. Who can't refu... (Below threshold)
Kapow:

Oh come on. Who can't refute what now Jay? How many investigations do they have to have on this before you're satisfied? There have already been TWO investigations into this, conducted by the DoJ and the National Archives inspector general, that is the proper authorites for this sort of misdemeanor. No one has suggested that the investigations weren't thorough or properly conducted. Berger plead guilty and got fined. Now the incident took place 3 years ago, and the investigations ended 18 months ago. So why are we only hearing about this now? Well Duncan Hunter (R-CA) says it's because they were waiting for the DoJ probe to end. But they ended a year and a half ago. It couldn't have anything to do with Sandy Berger's appearance on Fox News, where he criticised Bush's NK policy could it? No, because that only happened the day before the GOP announced this this unnecessary third investigation, so they're clearly unrelated. This is an election year stunt pure and simple, and a pretty weak one at that.

Now Lorie and Jay, you have both insinuated that the revelations about Foley were timed for political gain (even though just yesterday in the hearings Foley's chief of staff said that he had raised the issue with Hasterts staff in 2002 0r 2003) and yet you act like this investigation isn't an election year smoke screen? I'm sorry, but that beggers belief. Either you two have really short memories, or you're hacks who simply parrot the GOP line. So which is it?

"After a long investigat... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"After a long investigation, the lead prosecutor Noel Hillman, chief of the Justice Department's public integrity section, stated that Berger only removed classified copies of data stored on hard drives stored in the National Archives, and that no original material was destroyed.

"'There is no evidence that he intended to destroy originals,' said Mr. Hillman. 'There is no evidence that he did destroy originals. We have objectively and affirmatively confirmed that the contents of all the five documents at issue exist today and were made available to the 9/11 Commission."

Thanks for posting that information, muirgeo - and don't be dismayed by the squealing piggies - they always do that when stuck with the facts. They forget his is America, and they forget exactly what a democracy is, and how it works.

The whiners are the same people who want to shut down the free press, and regulate free speech on the Internet. They are dangerous people, who seek to limit the freedom of Americans to suit the purposes of the Republican party.

Well, we know he "did not h... (Below threshold)
epador:

Well, we know he "did not have sex" with those papers, right?

So who did?

I think the American Pulblic got screwed when they were destroyed, and we will never know what we were raped with.

Kapow,I already said... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

Kapow,
I already said the timing stinks, on more than one occasion and have said I don't care if the investigation takes place after the election, I just want to know what documents were taken and what other docs might have been taken on other occasions.

If you followed the links I provided in the column you would know that what has been described as subject to the proposed investigation goes beyond the investigation into the handful (or pants full) of docs that were taken from the archives and extends to other terrorism related docs. At least that is how I read it. The Clinton administration, as I said in the column, has a very dirty record on handling documents. There is no telling what has been destroyed over those eight years.

Take a cue from the Newsvin... (Below threshold)
Marc:

Take a cue from the Newsvine site. They provide each comment with a selection of "no value," "inflamatory" or "off topic."

After a certain amount of "clicks" on one of the selections that comment is "slosed" It can only be viewed by clicking it open. In other words deadheads like Lee and the others get their say in the thread but others have the option of seeing them if they are closed.

I'd hate to see the idiots ... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

I'd hate to see the idiots win -- Kevin, do your readers a favor and take out the trash once in a while. They can't be generating any more page views; quite the contrary.


Posted by: mesablue


WAhahahahahahaha!! Crybaby...you're pathetic. I suggest Red State, Blogs 4 Bush, Right Wing News, Sean Hannity or almost any other right wing blog because they quickly band dissenting view points as you would desire and unlike most Liberal blogs.

Yeah you don't back away from a fight....riiiiight. Answer the friicking legitimate questions I posed up above you pathetic momma's boy!!!!

I think I already said this... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

I think I already said this, but even though there were originals on hard drive or elsewhere does not make it okay to take or destroy the documents. What Berger did by taking them and not letting anyone know which docs he took, was to make them unavailable to others reviewing the documents for the 9/11 commission investigation, thereby impeding the investigation. If that is too confusing, let me break it down.

-- Berger takes docs from archives.

-- Those coming to review docs after Berger would not see the docs he took. Unless they knew he took them, and which docs he took, and asked the archives to go recreate the copies from originals on hard drive, then they would not see those documents when preparing for the hearings.

-- By removing the documents, Berger made it less likely that others would have knowledge of what was in them and be unable to ask questions about those documents during the hearings.

Are you seriously defending Berger for taking and destroying the documents, simply because another copy existed? I guess that would make it okay to steal anything, unless it was a one of a kind object. The guy stuffed them into his clothes! Is that fact lost on you? If it was perfectly all right to take them and destroy them he would have walked out with them in plain view. He took the docs to impede the investigation, not to avoid incurring photocopying charges.

If he would go to that extent to take and destroy documents with all that security, breaking laws while doing it, I just wonder how many inconvenient documents he might have destroyed in the White House when there were no archive personnel to call him on it.

Lest I be accused of backin... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

Lest I be accused of backing down from a fight, I have a sick child to take to the doctor now so if you guys don't see me around much today that is why.

I just hope he gets prosecu... (Below threshold)
jp2:

I just hope he gets prosecuted for espionage like Jay Tea suggests. Hey Jay - do you get the death penalty for that? Maybe Dick Cheney's aide knows, since he was the last person charged with espionage.

"Then I'll have to skim through my copy of "The Dictionary Of Modern War" once again. There are some interesting things they say about Israel's Merkava tank that I don't quite "get" in comparison to our Abrams"

Seriously Jay - do you want fries with that?


But on the serious side of things - I hope our nation can heal after this investigaton. It really has torn us apart.

Quoting Lori:I th... (Below threshold)
Kapow:

Quoting Lori:
I think I already said this, but even though there were originals on hard drive or elsewhere does not make it okay to take or destroy the documents.

Quoting Lee:
"After a long investigation, the lead prosecutor Noel Hillman, chief of the Justice Department's public integrity section, stated that Berger only removed classified copies of data stored on hard drives stored in the National Archives, and that no original material was destroyed.

The copies were from the hard drive, the originals weren't touched.

Lori:
Those coming to review docs after Berger would not see the docs he took ... they would not see those documents when preparing for the hearings.

By removing the documents, Berger made it less likely that others would have knowledge of what was in them and be unable to ask questions about those documents during the hearings.

Quoting Lee:
"There is no evidence that he intended to destroy originals,' said Mr. Hillman. 'There is no evidence that he did destroy originals. We have objectively and affirmatively confirmed that the contents of all the five documents at issue exist today and were made available to the 9/11 Commission."

Way to ignore the facts and just get on with the spin, Lori.

For the record, I'm not defending what Berger did, it's indefensible for a man with his level of experience. But the point here is that he broke the rules, he got punished for it, and it was all over a long time ago.

This timing isn't just a little off Lori, the timing belies what this is; a cheap, almost certainly ineffective, political ploy. A ploy that is all inuendo and no substance. (Sort of like Mark Foley's IMs)

Finally, if I understand you correctly what concerns you most, is that we get to the bottom of the matter, that we persue it thoroughly. So in that vein, I'm sure if (when?) some percieved impropriety on behalf of the Bush administration turns up, yours will be the first voice we'll hear calling for an investigation, right?

muirgeo:You flaming nitwit-... (Below threshold)
Xennady:

muirgeo:You flaming nitwit-haven't you noticed that you haven't been banned from posting here yet? Don't you think that undercuts your argument a teensy little bit? I find this especially irritating because I have attempted to engage leftists on their blogs several times-and found myself banned after an average of three posts.The left does not tolerate blasphemy-often they even boast about banning conservative posters! I'd actually give you points for leaving the liberal coccoon except I know you are so obliviously stupid that you think you win the arguments you engage in.Speaking of one of those-have you sent the DNC that list of Democratic military veterans so they can ask one of them what a US Army uniform looks like yet? LOL...muirgeo...IDIOT!!

Jay Tea,You should... (Below threshold)
Faith+1:

Jay Tea,

You should have access to the email address I post with. I welcome you to contact it and I can give a contact information to reach me and will provide the information you can use to independantly verify what I'm about to say--in other words I'm willing to back up what I say. If need be I'll sign my SF-180 to release the information to you.

I served in the USAF as pilot, communications officer and intel analyst. I have held Secret, TS and TS/SCI clearances. I have held positions as a classification officer and Officer In Charge of NATO Classifications and handling (it was an additional duty) while stationed in the US.

During my tour in Europe I was the US representative and security classification officer for Supreme Headquarters, Allied Powers Europe (S.H.A.P.E.), headquartered in Brussels.

I have functioned as an Officer In Charge (OIC) of a SCIF. I served as the commanding officer for the deployment of a command and control system for the intelligence gathering, planning and execution of air tasking orders. This system required us to handle material classified from Confidential through TS/SCI as well as various NATO systems and crypto-analysts equipment. I had the authority to declare something as classified and the authority to de-classify information (not alone, usually required an additional approval authority).

I'll match my credentials on dealing with classified with anyone.

In my professional opinion he violated the law to an extent that a prison term of 20-25 years would have been given to anyone else. If anyone but a politically connected operative like Sandy Berger had done what he did they would be breaking rocks at Leavenworth for that long. I know because I, personally, have brought charges and testified to send 4 individuals to prison for a long, long time for far less violations of national classified materials handling.

I find the entire Berger episode disgusting. I find Berger's disregard for rules and regulatios appalling for a person who served in his position. I find the defense of him and his actions insulting to every one of us who have sworn to defend this country (whether civilian or military). I find the Republicans lack of full prosecution of this matter just as offensive as the excuse making by his defenders.

I don't think anyone can (o... (Below threshold)

I don't think anyone can (or should attempt to) add to the comments made by "Faith".

It's really simple: Sandy Berger broke the law. Sandy Berger should be prosecuted for doing so. To the fullest extent of the law. This has not yet happened, in my opinion, to a sufficient extent.

Is the left's loathing of their own country so extreme that any betrayal of it is okay? How pathetic!

I also recommend a full tri... (Below threshold)
jp2:

I also recommend a full trial of one John Wilkes Booth. Sure he was tried already and he just might be dead, but I take a strong stand against him. What he did was awful, and I don't care if he was tried for it - it wasn't good enough or fair enough for my anger.

Faith+1 is 100% correct. An... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

Faith+1 is 100% correct. Anyone other than a yellow dog democrat would be in prison for a long term. Served 22 Years with 6.5 years in a MAJCOM Hq. Mess with that level of document and there's a slot for you in Ks.
That's my only fault with President Bush. He's too much of a gentleman and let some (a lot) of the criminal democrats slip through the law rather that raise a fuss and put them in jail.

He could be like, Murtha, the pride of Pa. and scream "Screw Em". What a jerk. But he has proven I have been wrong for 65 years about one thing. I thought Pa was populated with honorable people, so i'll admit I was wrong, it is populated with enough dishonorable or uneducated people to keep electing an idiot.

jp2, If we want to read or ... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

jp2, If we want to read or see childish acts of spoiled brats we'll watch the democrats on the campaign trail. You don't have to post your's.

First, I'm not defending Be... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

First, I'm not defending Berger. He should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law as should ALL politicians. I'm just saying I thought they pretty much did that over a year ago and this looks like total desperation on the Repugs part to find a scandal to counter the Foley mess with.

Xennady, OK let's... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

Xennady,

OK let's see how honest Xennady is. Which blog's where you banned from? What screen name and when was your last post?


I'll gladly give you the same from all the righty sights I've been banned from....and banned without using foul language.

"mun-go (linkman)-LAIR... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

"mun-go (linkman)-LAIR

What is it about the Clinto... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

What is it about the Clinton people being so obsessed with what's in their pants, huh?

The Berger events make ever... (Below threshold)
BlacquesJacquesShellacques:

The Berger events make everyone look bad.

Republicans gave Berger a walk. Why? Did he have something on someone? Was he just part of the good ol' boys club? There should be an investigation of this apparently bad prosecution.

One of the commenters called this a misdemeanor. Wow.

Berger's been prosecuted and punished. That's it, that's all - anything more is double jeopardy.

However, there are plenty of interesting questions. Why was Berger looking at paper rather than a computer monitor if the documents were on a hard drive? How many paper copies are there/were there? Why should there be any paper copies at all when the major reasons for electronic records include convenience and security? Were the missing papers annotated in pen, pencil or with 'stickies'? If they were did the document custodian know it? Did Berger annotate, perhaps absent-mindedly, and then realize his annotations had to go? What trhe hell does "One or more missing versions of the 15-page memo could not be located among Berger's possessions, and he thinks he probably discarded the papers"(Washington Post, July 20 2004) mean? Does anybody in the universe really believe that?

"The investigation determined that Berger was provided highly classified materials in an unauthorized setting on at least five occasions, and that NARA[National Archives and Records Administration] failed to report the theft of the classified materials to the OIG or any other law enforcement entity before conducting an improper investigation of the incident." Inspector General's report to Congress, March 31, 2006. Was Berger ever prosecuted for the 5 events of looking at classified documents in an unauthorized setting, whatever that means? How about NARA staff? 5 events? wtf.

Whole damn place leaks so bad I think I'll go on down and have a look-see at the current Iraq strategy. Oughta take 5 minutes and a box of donuts.

Hey muirgeo...The last one ... (Below threshold)
Xennady:

Hey muirgeo...The last one was a mostly non-political site badastronomy.com...I lasted one post that time-although I was commenting on a political post.The others were months before I started posting here and I forget who they were.In fact that was WHY I started commenting here.Same screen name.If you were banned from right wing sites then I join you in your outrage.If right wingers have to ban commenters like the dailykos-well,I don't have anything good to say about them.I expect more from my fellow rightwingers.If you can name a leftist site where I can comment without getting banned for blasphemy-name it.I'll write it down and visit later.

C'mon guys... All Burgar st... (Below threshold)
914:

C'mon guys... All Burgar stuffed down his pants are tax returns from 92-2000, 3 double d batteries,4 big macs with x-tra cheese,Willies little black book, Some dirt on Al Gore, A red stained dress, Intelligence on what where and how Bin Laden would strike and a box of cigars thats all purely innocent.

I believe that the document... (Below threshold)
Walter E. Wallis:

I believe that the documents stored on hard disk were not his objective - he wanted to remove copies of those dcuments that had individual comments in the margin representing actions and opinions of the documents. That is what he did.

I support the people who su... (Below threshold)
_Jon:

I support the people who support some form of comment moderation or change. I've requested that before.

At the very least, please put the "Poster"'s name at the top of the comment so the voice of the person writing can be correclty identified before reading.

I've pretty-much stopped reading comments here, mostly against my will. I want to read them. I just don't want to paw through the off-topic rants and such.

If I were a conspiracy-theorist, I'd conjecture that it is a coordinated attempt to silence discussion even here by frustrating conversation within the comment area.

Something needs to be done.

I think he copped a plea qu... (Below threshold)
Walter E. Wallis:

I think he copped a plea quick before Bush could catch on. It will take creative charging now to get around double jeopardy. Now, if he lies about any connection to others, he takes it for lying.

My problem with this invest... (Below threshold)

My problem with this investigation is that it should have been launched well before now and before it had been ajudicated (sp?). He has pled guilty to a misdemeanor for the crime which means, if I am not mistaken, double jeopardy has attached (I really hope somebody can show me that I am wrong on this). Unless they find that another crime has been committed Berger will most likely skate by without facing anymore than he already has.

The level of discussion ove... (Below threshold)
Mike:

The level of discussion over the past few months has fallen to a junior high school level thanks to about 5 visitors. There's certainly a market for that, but the question is whether that's the target market for this site.

Berger was certainly given a 'sweetheart' deal because he was a politician. I find it laughable that the same morons that posting for Hassert to step down and posting in defense of Berger. Party above country, huh guys ?

Once Sandy take a polygraph... (Below threshold)
DanQ:

Once Sandy take a polygraph Im sure it will become clear




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy