Last weekend’s media focus on the death of Pope John Paul II covered up the report of yet another scandal to add to the legacy of President Bill Clinton:
After almost a year of denying any wrongdoing, Clinton’s national security adviser, Samuel R. Berger, pleaded guilty on Friday to the charge of stealing classified files from the national Archives and destroying them. His plea agreement with the US Justice Department requires him to surrender his top security clearance and pay a $10,000 fine.
Fair enough. But here’s the real story:
After it became clear in the summer of 2003 that there were no WMDs in Iraq, Democrats began condemning President Bush and his national security advisers (Condoleeza Rice in particular) for the intelligence failures they claimed were responsible not only for giving Bush a pretext to go to war but also for allowing bin Laden’s Al-Qaeda to kill over 3000 Americans with relative ease.
Indeed, after John Kerry won the Democratic nomination to challenge Bush for the presidency, he hired Mr Berger to help frame attacks on Bush to further undermine his reputation as a great war president. And, the most pointed dagger in Mr Berger’s rhetorical arsenal was the alleged failure of the Bush administration to discover the obvious signs of bin Laden’s 9/11 plot that were posted throughout America’s intelligence agencies.
So why did Mr Berger steal the documents? To cover his ass (and Bill Clinton’s too)!
The conspirators – Berger and Clinton: Damn!
You see, the Democrats welcomed the 9/11 Commission on Intelligence Failures because they assumed it would focus only on the Bush Administration. But then the commissioners announced that because Bush was in the White House for only 9 months when America was attacked, they would need to extend the scope of their investigation back into the Clinton Administration to get a more accurate assessment of these failures.
This announcement unnerved Berger and Clinton because they knew what the commissioners would find in their classified files:
Evidence showing that – despite their condemnation of the Bush Administration – Clinton and his national security advisers were every bit as guilty of intelligence failures that led to the 9/11 attacks on America.
Therefore – in a scheme worthy of Nixon and his plumbers, Clinton and Berger apparently decided the only thing to do was to make the files disappear.
Actually, this is a tried-and-true tactic of the Clintons: Recall how they made Hillary’s billing records disappear when she and her law partners were being investigated for shady dealings at their Arkansas firm? She played hide and seek with the prosecutors and, ultimately, left her “best friend” and law partner, Webster Hubbell, to face the rap and go to jail. Indeed, the hapless “fall guy” is another tried-and-true tactic of the Clintons: Remember Susan McDougal?
At any rate, to execute their scheme, Berger walked into the building where the Clinton Administration files were archived and stuffed the incriminating pages into his socks, pants and jacket, then took them home and shredded them.
Cameras, cameras everywhere and not one did he see? (National Security Expert, indeed!)
Partisan Democrats have proffered the fatuous explanation that Berger, inadvertently, committed this crime because he was tired after reviewing the classified documents on 2 September 2003. They also claimed that because the Commission had access to those same documents from other sources that Berger had no motive to steal them (as if having a motive would excuse his theft).
Of course, it is axiomatic that the decision to cheat or steal automatically vitiates good sense. After all, who would’ve have thought that a smart man like President Nixon would countenance the Watergate burglary; or that a political genius like President Clinton would tell boldfaced lies – under oath – to a federal grand jury about a consensual sex act with Monica Lewinsky?
No, the real story here is that Clinton and Berger had a clear motive to cover up potentially damaging information to protect their careers. And, it remains a curious quirk of justice in politics that cover-ups invariably expose politicians to greater compromise, shame and, very often, criminal prosecution.
Another friend of Bill (FOB) takes the fall as the Clintons seek new disciples to preach the gospel of their second coming…in 08?
News and Politics
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.