What Papers Were Worth Berger Risking It All?

The Post: ‘Berger found himself in a criminal investigation, one that he chose not to tell Kerry’s campaign about until this week.’ We don’t know that, of course. That’s simply what he claims. Similarly, they report as fact Berger’s assertion that ‘despite searching his home and office (he) couldn’t find’ the classified documents he illegally took with him. ‘An archives employee called former White House Deputy Council Bruce Lindsey to talk about this.’ Bruce Lindsey was the Fixer, capital F, who handled all the Clinton cover-ups. So you’ve got somebody here a government official with knowledge of the investigation, called Clinton’s guy, while the Democrats are out there trying to say that the Bush team was in on this and leaking all this stuff. Lindsey and Berger, by the way, were both with Clinton when he testified to the commission — the myth that he brilliantly testified alone while Bush needed Cheney there is officially B.S. thanks to NewsMax.

We now know Bill Clinton probably knew about this before George Bush did. The Post reports that Berger ‘took 40 to 50 pages of notes’! Now, you can take notes, but you can’t take them with you – and you certainly can’t stuff them in your pants, socks, briefcase, etc. The question remains: What papers were important enough for Sandy Berger to risk his reputation and career and fall on his sword for this way? What did he take notes on? That’s what needs to be released here. Not who leaked what and not the timing. We don’t need to hear about what a great public servant this guy is or was.

Speaking of which, I urge you to read the column by Martin Peretz, editor-in-chief, chairman and co-owner of the liberal (though not as liberal as it once was) New Republic and a big friend of Algore. He’s known Berger since the McGovern campaign, but says he does not like him because Berger ‘believes there is no international dispute that can’t be solved by the U.S. walking away from it.’ Quote: ‘Berger did run the Kerry foreign policy team at the writing of the Democratic Party platform a few weeks ago when the only opposition easily pacified came from a handful of Dennis Kucinich loyalists.’ The Kucinich dream won’t die.

‘So my question,’ writes Mr. Peretz, ‘is, did Berger, who knew that he was under scrutiny since last fall, alert Kerry to the combustible fact that he was the subject of a criminal probe by the justice department, the FBI? My guess is not. Kerry is far too smart, too responsible to have kept him around had he known. But if Kerry didn’t know, it tells you a lot about Berger. Too much, really.’ A more important question, of course, is: What was contained in the papers that Berger snatched? The answers to that question might answer another. Maybe Clinton’s top national security aide didn’t want others to see what they documented.

<*ICON*>Your Resource for Combating the Partisan Media, Liberals and Bush-Haters…
<a target=new href=”/home/menu/fstack.guest.html”>(…Rush’s John F. Kerry Stack of Stuff packed with quotes, flips & audio!)</a></span>