Have You Ever Stuffed Your Pants Inadvertently?

[Utah]

Sandy Berger did. I am suprised that this story was not brought up by all the Bush bashers on this forum. Surely, no one would suggest that these bashers are one sided hypocrites? I wonder what they would say if a top Republican was stuffing his pants with ultra classified material?

I am trying to think of any way that stuffing your pants with classified material could be inadvertent. Maybe there was a hot chick outside the room and Sandy was simply trying to beef up his bulge and he accidently grabbed classified material to do so???

Also, if you read the New York Times or CNN you will see clear bias in the story. They completely fail to mention the facts of the case and make it seem that it was an accident. In neither story do they mention that Berger has admitted to stuffing material in his pants. Its not even The New York Times lead story and they downplay it with a title making it seem like a simple campaign issue. How is that possible? Clinton's National Security Advisor is stealing top secret documents and the times thinks Microsofts dividend story is bigger. hmmmm.....

[David Steele]

In the story I read he admitted to putting his own notes in his pocket but denied the rest and challenged a real witness to come forward with such a claim. His own notes were supposed to be cleared before taken however.

Of course were only Canada here so maybe were in on the coverup.

D.

[nicky g]

In the story below his lawyer admits he took copies of several documents with him, inadvertently according to the lawyer, and may have lost one of them. He claims it was a report Berger commissioned Richard Clarke to write for him during the Clinton era; if that's the case I can't see that there would have been much to leak.

CNN (http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/21/berger.probe/)

[Bubbagump]

[ QUOTE ]
I am suprised that this story was not brought up by all the Bush bashers on this forum

[/ QUOTE ]

This surprises you? Now that's funny.

I'm not the least bit surprised that nobody brought it up on this forum yesterday. But to be fair here, the only thing we no for sure about this incident is that Berger took the documents illegally. The whole thing about Berger stuffing his pants (and shoes as I heard in one report) are rumor at this point and have not been proven.

Still, this whole thing is highly suspicious. And I hope, for once our govenment can do a complete, thorough and unbiased investigation of this incident and if it is proven that Bergers actions were intentional, they should throw the book at him and anybody who had knowledge of what he did.

Bubbagump

[David Steele]

Yes but he only admits to putting something in his portfolio not stuffing his pants etc.

From your cnn link:


Breuer said Berger reviewed "thousands" of pages of documents during three visits to the Archives in July, September and October of 2003. He said Berger took notes in plain view of Archives staff and put them in his coat and pants pockets when he left.

Breuer strongly denied information from law enforcement sources that an Archives staffer told investigators Berger also placed something in his socks.

"That's categorically false and ridiculous," he said, adding that such an allegation had never been made by prosecutors and first surfaced Monday in the media.

Asked why Berger removed the notes if he knew it was a violation of policy, Breuer said "because there's something more important than Archives' procedure, and that's the hard work of the 9/11 commission.".

D.

[nicky g]

Yes, sorry. I thought what you meant was that he was denying taking anything other than notes, whether in his pockets or otherwise.

[nicky g]

"only thing we no for sure about this incident is that Berger took the documents illegally"

He hasn't been charged with any crime.

[nicky g]

Although presumably taking the classified documents out is very much against the law (in the report his lawyer says taking the notes isn;t), and given that he's admitted that, I guess you are right.

[cardcounter0]

Former National Security Advisor takes COPIES of documents, some of which were his own notes.

WOOOOOOOOO-BOY!!!! Somebody get a rope.

[Utah]

That pretty laughable. You dont think that there would be a 1000 posts on this site damning the Bush administration if Dick Cheney was seen stuffing classified material into his pockets, whether he had written the notes or not.

I would bet my life that the Bush Bashers would be calling for Cheney and Bush's head over it and claming it shows they were responsible for 9/11, they were asleep at the wheel, etc. And, to be honest, they would have a point because it would be a gross violation.

Somehow, if its Clinton's National Security Adviser than its just some notes that he wrote. No Biggie (we will just forget about the classfied report that is missing that is only allowed to be remove in a suitcase handcuffed to the person. I mean, whats the big deal - its only some ink and paper right)

Lets ask a simple question - why would he remove anything? I think the answer is crystal clear. Do you not agree?

Bonus fun question. Why would he stuff them in his pants and not put them in a suitcase if it was inadvertent. I highly doubt that a former national security advisor has a habit of stuff notes in his pocket.

fade to circa 1998
Clinton: "Sandy. Quick. We have a situation in Iraq. Recite to me the notes from yesterday's meeting!!
Berger: "Right away sir!.....wait.....um......they should be in my left pants pocket...no....wait...they are in my right pocket.....DAMN!!.....Sorry Mr. President....I need to run home. I left them in my other pants. Ill be back in 15 minutes.

[nicky g]

I don't agree. It's highly irresponsible of someone to lose a classified report; that is a disgrace and it is right he lost hs postion on the Kerry campaign and being investigated. The notes and where he put them aren't really that interesting. If he didn't need them immediately and was a sloppy person he might stuff them in his pocket. It wasn't ilegal for him to remove them without someone checking. The comparison with Cheney and Bush is silly; they are the Vice-President and President respectively, Berger is of much less importance. Furthermore, he has quit while Cheney, RUmsfeld et al stayed in place despite clear conflicts of interest, torture and killings on their watch and a massive intelligence and security cock-up in Iraq. Taking notes and a report you've already read (indeed you commissioned) while irresponsible and deserving of punishment if true, is totally trivial in comparison.

[cardcounter0]

Uh, no. Don't see your point at all.

Bush and his band of corporate crooks have so many things so much worse without a whimper from anyone. Orders of magnitude worse. 900 dead US Soldiers worse. Fake, False documents, and knowningly false testimony before the UN worse. A little nudge-nudge wink-wink with US Supreme Court Justices worse. A refusal to testify under oath before Senate Committees worse. Refusal to release details of secret meetings with accused Felons worse. Stonewalling, stacking the deck, and limited testimony worse.

The biggest thing I can see is that by putting documents in his pants pocket -- sexually repressed republicans are chanting "He put them in his pants! He put them in his pants!" as they masturbate. See the title of this post. I guess I "stuff my pants" with my car keys and change every day.

[cardcounter0]

ALSO >>> this incident happened over a year ago, and now two days before the 9/11 report is released to the public, the smoke and mirror machine is cranking up.

$1 will get you $10 that by the end of the week after the report is released, John Ashcroft calls a special press conference to report of some Terrorist Activity (ie - bad people may want to do some bad things at some unspecified time in the future).

Let the smoke and misdirection begin! The 9/11 report is about to hit the fan!

[Rushmore]

Maybe he oughta apply for a job at Los Alamos.

[Utah]

I am saying that the act of Cheney taking his own notes would be seen as incredbily damning. I am not commenting on the administration as a whole or comparing the Bush and Clinton administration.

My whole point being that people dont look at issues objectively and evidence or actions take on a different weight depending on who is doing the act. You doubt for a second that if Michael Moore had proof that Cheney or any republican (whether in office or not) had removed classified information that it wouldnt have been a highlight of the film and that Bush haters would say that the act of removing documents is evil?

[Utah]

Sure. I dont doubt that for a second. However, as I have said many times, judge the act on itself. Republican bad actions in no way make a democrats actions less vile (and vice versa).

Its possible that Berger is scum and that the republicans are scum.

[nicky g]

Well it depends. If Dick Cheney lost a clasified document then he should quit. That would dampen the outrage fairly quickly. This guy did quit. Whether it would be denounced as "evil" or not, I don't know. It would dependon the nature of the document and what he did with it. In these circumstances, I would say not. Presumably Dick Cheney has the right to take home classified info anyway so it's not really comparable. Maybe Michael Moore would say so, who knows. Most of the accusations of the "Bush-bashers" refer to the more serious kind of things I referred to in my last post, not comparatively trivial things such as this.

[Cptkernow]

"Surely, no one would suggest that these bashers are one sided hypocrites? "

Yea, you would be first to bring this up had it been a Bush aide.

Pot meet Kettle.

[andyfox]

David Sklansky stuffs his with math formulae to impress the chicks. I don't have to put artificial anything in mine for all to be suitably impressed.

[nothumb]

[ QUOTE ]
I am saying that the act of Cheney taking his own notes would be seen as incredbily damning. I am not commenting on the administration as a whole or comparing the Bush and Clinton administration.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nyak. You are.

Not directly, but in that subtle, presumptive way that is so popular among people like Ann Coulter. You're not actually defending Bush Administration policies, nor are you actually attacking Clinton or making a substantive comparison. But you are implying that Democrats get away with all manner of crap while innocent Republicans, with no attempt to pass the buck, take the blame for incidents of similar magnitude. And of course the press is just taking cheap shots at Bush every day while looking the other way when Berger screws up.

You are making a comparison between the two sides, an implicit comparison about their character and their treatment in the media. And I don't agree.

NT

[sameoldsht]

Classified information is stolen and lost and he thinks this is humorous?

"We were all laughing about it on the way over here," the former president said of the investigation into Samuel "Sandy" Berger on classified terrorism documents missing from the National Archives.

STORY (http://www.denverpost.com/Stories/0,1413,36~53~2284437,00.html)

[cardcounter0]

Yes, sounds like a reasonable explanation. Sounds like Berger was one of those "Paper-Pilers and Note Pack rats".

So, has any progress been made on who leaked the classified information that resulting in the "outing" of a CIA Agent?

[sfer]

[ QUOTE ]
Also, if you read the New York Times or CNN you will see clear bias in the story. They completely fail to mention the facts of the case and make it seem that it was an accident. In neither story do they mention that Berger has admitted to stuffing material in his pants. Its not even The New York Times lead story and they downplay it with a title making it seem like a simple campaign issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? The Times quotes Berger's attorney as saying he put papers in his jacket and pants pockets. Also, how is this bias? Isn't pointing out Berger's role as an advisor to Kerry good for the Bush campaign (i.e. the prior NSA couldn't keep secrets and respect national security and he was advising Kerry), certainly better than just pointing out he was NSA for Clinton?

[James Boston]

[ QUOTE ]
Have You Ever Stuffed Your Pants Inadvertently?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and when her hand got free she sure was pissed.

[Utah]

Nah.....

I am making the comment here because think board as a whole slants violently towards anti-Bush. Every little nuance thing that shows Bush's culpability is mentioned.....a fourth rate low level analyst somewhere says we shouldnt attack Iraq and people shout SEE!! However, when it is shown that Joe Wilson is a liar there isnt even a peep here.

Now, I am not implying the democrats get away will all manners of crap while the republicans dont. I am only implying that for these boards. If these boards were pro republican the same thing would happen in the other direction.

My biggest point is that people as a whole (republican or democrat or other) have a very hard time looking at things objectively. I point out logical flaws all the time in anti-bush arguments and I am called a fox news watching Zombie, even though its about 95% against me voting for Bush.

To the other point, there is a bias in the media. I will not make any comments about its direction, but it is there. Fox News, typically conservative, covers issues far differently than CNN or NYT, which are typically liberal. But this is a conversation for a different time.

btw - I cant stand Ann Coultier and I generally dislike people filled with hate.

[Utah]

Yes I would as a matter of fact. Although there would be 40 posts that would have beat me to it.

I quickly called Bush a liar and said that his actions regarding the aircraft carrier flap were unacceptable.

I am not a republican apologist. I just hate bad logic /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Utah]

So, has any progress been made on who leaked the classified information that resulting in the "outing" of a CIA Agent?

Well, kinda. Its been shown that Joe Wilson is a liar.

If someone did "out" and agent then I hope he goes to jail and lose their job. However, I dont believe it has been shown that a crime even took place - although I havent watched this story closely.

[nicky g]

"Well, kinda. Its been shown that Joe Wilson is a liar."

Wilson may have lied about his wife recommending him for the trip to NIger. But she didn't out herself as an agent.

[Utah]

You are correct about the NYT, and it was my mistake. I didnt see that there was a second page to the story.

However, I did note that when I went back to check my facts that the story disappeared on the front page of both the times and CNN but remained on Fox. Clearly, these organization report news differently.

[Utah]

Correct. I didnt imply otherwise.

[sameoldsht]

Anyone read Clinton's "My Lies"...ahem, "My Life"?

Just wondering if there's a chapter about how Clinton did a spectacular job fighting terror by bragging about foiling the millenium plot.

Richard Clark himself called the disruption of the plot as "lucky" and really had nothing to do with any kind of proactive action by the Clinton administration. Some speculate that this info was included in the calssified documents that were stolen by Berger, and Clinton didn't want that info made public - it would stain his "legacy" even further, especially after bragging in his "My Lies" book.

Naaah, I guess that would be a Vast Left Wing Conspiracy, and we all know that's impossible. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[nicky g]

"Correct. I didnt imply otherwise. "

Then where do you get the idea that no crime has been committed?

[Utah]

Then where do you get the idea that no crime has been committed?

I didnt say a crime wasnt committed. I simply said that I am not sure it has been shown yet that one was actually committed. Big difference. Like I said, I didnt follow the case closely. However, I did read somewhere that it hasnt yet been shown that releasing her name was even a crime because of either her classification level or because of other circumstances. I wish I could find the article.

[nicky g]

OK. Thanks for the reply.