MuD & PHuD

Apparently Sandy Berger, at the request of Bill Clinton, had been reviewing classified documents relating to the 9/11 Commission's investigation...and the funny thing is, some of those classified documents ended up coming home with him. Amazing. The article notes that:

Berger is the second high-level Clinton-era official to face controversy over taking classified information home.

Former CIA (news - web sites) Director John Deutch was pardoned by President Clinton just hours before Clinton left office in 2001 for taking home classified information and keeping it on unsecured computers at his home during his time at the CIA and Pentagon (news - web sites). Deutch was just about to enter into a plea agreement for a misdemeanor charge of mishandling government secrets when the pardon was granted.

I guess that Berger is only the second if you don't count Hillary's little oops-I-somehow-ended-up-with-FBI-files-on-various-political-opponents-in-the-White-House-residence...humm...

Sorry, I don't believe even for one second that this was an accident. I don't pretend to have a motive, but the fact is that Berger is a lawyer and he has had plenty of experience working with classified documents and I just don't buy this being a mistake. Especially with this description:

Berger and his lawyer said Monday night he knowingly removed the handwritten notes by placing them in his jacket and pants, and also inadvertently took copies of actual classified documents in a leather portfolio.

[...and...]

Breuer said Berger was allowed to take handwritten notes but also knew that taking his own notes out of the secure reading room was a "technical violation of Archive procedures, but it is not all clear to us this represents a violation of the law."

So, Berger admitted that he did something that is a techincal violation of Archive procedures...and is perhaps actually against the law. At the very least he should never be allowed back into the Archives. As for criminal charges, let's leave that to the JD.

More:

You know, this didn't hit me before but this quote might prove interesting:

"I deeply regret the sloppiness involved, but I had no intention of withholding documents from the commission, and to the contrary, to my knowledge, every document requested by the commission from the Clinton administration was produced," Berger said in a statement to the AP.

The question that this leaves unanswered is: Did anyone volunteer important documents, or did the former Clinton Admin people only follow the letter of the law with respect to providing documents?

Maybe I'm just being paranoid here...but when it comes to Bill's Admin I think we've got every right to look for hidden loopholes.

Update:

Captain's Quarters has some excellent commentary on this story (his first post is here):

For my money, that's at least one "inadvertently" too many, and that is not a literary criticism. Perhaps this explanation will fly for those who have never worked around classified documents, but since I spent three years producing such material, I can tell you that it's impossible to "inadvertently" take or destroy them. For one thing, such documents are required to have covers -- bright covers in primary colors that indicate their level of classification. Each sheet of paper is required to have the classification level of the page (each page may be classified differently) at the top and bottom of each side of the paper. Documents with higher classifications are numbered, and each copy is tracked with an access log, and nowadays I suppose they're tracking them by computers.

Read the whole thing.

Update 2:

Junk Yard Blog also has some good commentary.

Update 3:

Glenn points out (pointing to Sissy Willis) that, as usual, when a big story hits the blogosphere has the ability to flesh out the details long before the Old Grey Lady.

A great quote:

Said one important person there as I nodded myself into a case of whiplash: "What we define as 'quality journalism' is what our peers define as quality journalism . . . We keep trying to give our readers what we call quality journalism, and our readers call it crap."

Yep, 'nough said.

Update 4:

General BS and smokescreen from Gergen:

Former Clinton aide David Gergen, who worked with Berger in the White House, was interviewed on NBC's "Today" show Tuesday and said of Berger's actions, "I think it's more innocent than it looks."

Yeah, I'm sure that stuffing Classified documents in one's jacket, pants and socks is "more innocent than it looks." Right.

How about this smokescreen:

Gergen also said he found it "suspicious" that news of the investigation should surface just at the Sept. 11 commission is about release its report.

Ah yes, the old VRWC rears its ugly head yet again =).

|