Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: edit  (Read 1133 times)

The ZAPINATOR

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 6380
    • MSN Messenger - N/A
    • AOL Instant Messenger - N/A
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - N/A
    • View Profile
    • N/A
edit
« on: July 23, 2004, 02:07:51 PM »
edit

jas9999

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 727
  • Actual Law Student
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: An Op-Ed piece about Berger
« Reply #1 on: July 23, 2004, 02:14:31 PM »
wow, that's a nice smear. even if everything it says is true, and i have no reason to doubt it since i don't know much about berger, it misses the point.

berger was accused of taking copies - not originals, of drafts - not final versions, of memos. it's a baseless accusation to say he was trying to keep things from being seen publicly, because all the original copies were left behind... just as it's baseless to say that he was trying to help kerry by sneaking these out, because kerry has the security clearance due to his senate intelligence and foreign relations duties to see them all anyway.

The ZAPINATOR

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 6380
    • MSN Messenger - N/A
    • AOL Instant Messenger - N/A
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - N/A
    • View Profile
    • N/A
edit
« Reply #2 on: July 23, 2004, 02:25:09 PM »
edit

buster

  • Guest
Re: An Op-Ed piece about Berger
« Reply #3 on: July 23, 2004, 02:26:39 PM »
Good points, jas.

I'm confused (and I mean that sincerely) by the article's conclusion from those four examples that Berger was the one actually making the decisions. Those examples certainly don't indicate that -- does the report do so elsewhere?

The point about the domestic political situation, though, is a good one. That's why it was always assumed that the president would be immune from civil suit while in office. Had that idea been upheld, the Paula Jones case would have had to wait and we might just have found out about Monica in the last couple of years.

(No, I'm not excusing the counter-terrorism failures of the Clinton adminstration. So don't start. You know who you are.)

buster

  • Guest
Re: An Op-Ed piece about Berger
« Reply #4 on: July 23, 2004, 02:28:13 PM »
They were copies of documents the 9/11 Commission already had. Furthermore, members of the 9/11 Commission have stated that the incident had no effect whatsoever on their work.

Well, I've read that he claims he THOUGHT he was taking copies, but that's not actually what he was accused of, in my understanding.  I think there are actual documents missing, holes in the record, ORIGINALS.  If I'm wrong on this, I'm wrong, but that's what I read the uproar about it is about a week or so ago when all this started coming up.  If he did just take copies, obviously there's no issue other than that it's sloppy, and that says nothing about his integrity, only about his sloppiness.  Clinton just kind of laughed the whole thing off... of course, Clinton just kind of laughs everything off, which is what I absolutely love about him.  The man knows the game and how to play it better than anyone else.  Utterly fascinating in my opinion.

But getting back to Berger, if he really only did take copies, this is one hell of a smear piece.  I realize it's slanted toward the right because I found it on Drudge, but if he took originals that's an objective fact that can't be slanted either left or right; and, I assume, a crime.

ZAP

The ZAPINATOR

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 6380
    • MSN Messenger - N/A
    • AOL Instant Messenger - N/A
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - N/A
    • View Profile
    • N/A
edit
« Reply #5 on: July 23, 2004, 02:35:23 PM »
edit

buster

  • Guest
Re: An Op-Ed piece about Berger
« Reply #6 on: July 23, 2004, 02:40:17 PM »
It's probably still illegal, although even that is debatable (it was definitely a procedural breach). Whether or not he'll be punished is largely up to DOJ, although I suspect whatever else happens he won't be getting any more national security jobs (and deservedly so).

As for what the big deal is, all I can say is...exactly.

If they're not originals, I don't see what the big deal is about.

gooooooo

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 265
  • 3.67, OCT. 2
    • View Profile
Re: An Op-Ed piece about Berger
« Reply #7 on: July 24, 2004, 01:40:37 PM »
OK, for some reason I'd read somewhere that they were originals.  Since I get all my news from the internet and don't watch TV, there's no telling WHERE I read that, or even if I just misinterpreted what I read.  If they're not originals, I don't see what the big deal is about.

ZAP

I read that they were originals too and that he just thought they were copies. 

This op/ed piece definitely skews the overall picture by placing the blame solely on Berger.  There were many factors behind the decision not to get bin Laden that had nothing to do with Berger (i.e. CIA reluctance to take risks, slow communication btwn the FBI, CIA and the Whitehouse, and bureaucracy in general.)  There was a good New Yorker article about it a couple years back. 

The ZAPINATOR

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 6380
    • MSN Messenger - N/A
    • AOL Instant Messenger - N/A
    • Yahoo Instant Messenger - N/A
    • View Profile
    • N/A
edit
« Reply #8 on: July 26, 2004, 11:56:08 AM »
edit

buster

  • Guest
Re: An Op-Ed piece about Berger
« Reply #9 on: July 26, 2004, 03:24:48 PM »
Some further reading suggests that I was incorrect in noting so definitively that the documents were copies rather than originals. Sorry 'bout that. Members of the Commission, though, did state that the incident did not impact their work and that they had all the documents they should have had.