Tell Me Again…..

….Why Sandy "Socks" Berger is not in jail? The Washington Post has more details about the way the Berger document stealing was mishandled at the time it occurred. Even the head of the 9/11 Commission is extremely unhappy about how little they were told by Justice Department officials before they had Berger under oath to testify. Had they known about what Berger did, more and different questions would have been asked.

Under debate during the Nov. 23, 2004, meeting was Brachfeld's contention that President Clinton's former national security adviser Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger could have stolen original, uncatalogued, highly classified terrorism documents 14 months earlier by wrapping them around his socks and beneath his pants, as National Archives staff member John Laster reported witnessing.

Brachfeld said he was worried that during four visits in 2002 and 2003, Berger had the opportunity to remove more than the five documents he admitted taking. Brachfeld wanted the Justice Department to notify officials of the 9/11 Commission that Berger's actions — in combination with a bungled Archives response — might have obstructed the commission's review of Clinton's terrorism policies.

The Justice Department spurned the advice, and some of Brachfeld's colleagues at the Archives greeted his warnings with accusations of disloyalty. But more than three years later, as Brachfeld and House lawmakers have pushed new details about Berger's actions onto the public record — such as Berger's use of a construction site near the Archives to temporarily hide some of the classified documents — Brachfeld's contentions have attracted fresh support……

…..The committee further argued that the 9/11 Commission should have been told more about Berger and about Brachfeld's concerns, a suggestion that resonated with Philip Zelikow, the commission's former executive director.

Zelikow said in an interview last week that "I think all of my colleagues would have wanted to have all the information at the time that we learned from the congressional report, because that would have triggered some additional questions, including questions we could have posed to Berger under oath."

The commission's former general counsel, Dan Marcus, now an American University law professor, separately expressed surprise at how little the Justice Department told the commission about Berger and said it was "a little unnerving" to learn from the congressional report exactly what Berger reviewed at the Archives and what he admitted to the FBI — including that he removed and cut up three copies of a classified memo.

When Socks committed his Bergerlary a real effort to find out exactly what he stole should have been launched. Instead, he escaped with a sweetheart of a plea bargain agreement. Who covered for this man and why? Personally, I think that should be looked into - hard.

• 

  By jpe, Wednesday, 21 February , 2007 @ 10:34 am

  The Bush Justice Dpt. doesn’t “do” investigations.

Other Links to this Post

1. The Thunder Run — Wednesday, 21 February , 2007 @ 10:22 am

2. Flopping Aces — Wednesday, 21 February , 2007 @ 11:32 am

3. The Anchoress » Religion & haters, abortion, Jamil and more — Wednesday, 21 February , 2007 @ 11:34 pm

4. Maggie's Farm — Thursday, 22 February , 2007 @ 10:47 am