May 20, 2009 Political
In October 2003 Sandy Berger, former Clinton National Security Adviser, stole classified documents from the National Archive. There is no doubt he stole them because he stuffed them down his pants. He stole the documents to cover up any missteps taken by him and Clinton with regard to our security. Berger did not want the documents discovered during all the 9/11 investigations.
He was charged with, and pleaded guilty to, a misdameaner because it was determined he only took copies and that the documents were backed up on a hard drive.
Today it was announced that a hard drive containing a terabyte of information from the Clinton years is missing from the National Archives. The drive contains sensitive information as well as personally identifying information such as Social Security Numbers.
The Inspector General states the drive was stolen sometime between October 2008 and March 2009 after it was left unsecured in an area that is accessed by any number of people including visitors.
Did Sandy Berger visit the Archives during that time frame? Perhaps he was not satisfied with stealing copies and wanted the electronic version as well.
Can you imagine him meeting up with Bill Clinton after stuffing the hard drive down his pants?
CLINTON: Hey Sandy. Is that a hard drive in your pants or are you just happy to see me?
Nov 3, 2007 Political
During the last debate Tim Russert asked Hillary Clinton if she was prepared to disclose her White House related documents before the election so that people could judge her qualifications. The correspondence in question is mostly between Hillary and Husband Bill. She has made claims that her time in the White House has given her experience and it is this experience which makes her the better candidate. Russert asked specifically about those communications:
RUSSERT: Senator Clinton, Iâ€™d like to follow up, because in terms of your experience as first lady, in order to give the American people an opportunity to make a judgment about your experience, would you allow the National Archives to release the documents about your communications with the president, the advice you gave? Because, as you well know, President Clinton has asked the National Archives not to do anything until 2012. [emphasis mine] National Review Online
Hillary stated that as far as she knew the health care papers had been released and that things were moving as quickly as the archives could go. When Russert told her that President Clinton had written a letter asking that communications between the two of them not be released she said that she did not believe it was in their control. This is a misleading answer and Bill Clinton’s response was just as misleading.
Bill was out trying to extinguish the flames after Hillary’s poor debate performance and Bill stated that Russert asked a “breathtakingly misleading” question:
Former President Clinton said Friday that a letter he wrote to the National Archives was to expedite release of his papers, not slow the process or hide anything as rivals are suggesting in criticism of his wife.
Hillary Rodham Clinton was quizzed during this week’s Democratic presidential debate as to why correspondence between her and her husband from their White House years remained bottled up at the National Archives. Barack Obama said that was a problem for her as a candidate after “we have just gone through one of the most secretive administrations in our history.”
One issue is whether Bill Clinton had sent a letter to the Archives asking that the communications not be released until 2012, and whether Hillary Clinton would lift any ban, a question raised by debate moderator Tim Russert.
“She was incidental to the letter, it was done five years ago, it was a letter to speed up presidential releases, not to slow them down,” the former president told reporters Friday. “And she didn’t even, didn’t know what he was talking about. And now that I’ve described to you what the letter said, you can readily understand why she didn’t know what he was talking about.”
Russert’s question “was breathtakingly misleading,” Bill Clinton said. [emphasis mine] Yahoo News
Let us see who was misleading in all this. First of all, Clinton wrote a letter on August 19, 1994 asking that all categories of his correspondence be kept from disclosure until twelve years after his term as President expires (which would actually be 2013). This is an admission by him in the 2002 memo. I do not think that is asking the National Archives to speed anything up, as Clinton claimed in the interview. It is likely that he was ensuring that the records would remain sealed for a future Hillary run. Remember, these two have been planning this campaign for a long time and not releasing them until 2013 would ensure she could run for a second term, assuming she won a first. Even releasing them in late 2012 would not hurt her by the time people were able to request and get them the election would be over.
Secondly, the letter Clinton wrote in 2002 where he asked that certain items be released earlier than 2013 and those two categories were appointments and submitting advice. However, in the body of the letter he explicitly excludes communication between Hillary and him; “… communications directly between the President and the First Lady, and their families, unless routine in nature…” This means that he DID NOT ask for this to be released early because he excluded it from the request. It also means that Russert was 100% correct in his questioning and that Bill Clinton was the one who was “breathtakingly misleading” because he said he wrote the letter to speed up the process, not to slow it down but since he excluded items between him and Hillary he did not speed up the process that Russert asked about. Russert specifically asked about items between her and her husband. This is typical Clinton double speak and their mind numbed, eye glazed, followers will listen to him and believe every word he said.
This is no different than I did not have sex with that woman or I was closer to getting bin Laden than anyone or any other statement he has made that has proved to be false. I wonder if he wagged his finger when he was talking about this? That is a tell tale Clinton is lying sign. In any event, he was breathtakingly misleading and the Clinton camp is trying to put the focus on Russert and indicate that he was unfair. He was 100% fair and he asked the follow up questions that too few are willing to ask her highness, Hillary. Hillary was finally taken to task and not allowed to steer off subject or to avoid answers. When she gave a non answer she was called on it and then instead of being honest she played around until she was able to take two contrasting positions in two minutes. The Clintons can blame Russert but it is they who are being dishonest with America. Unfortunately, those who support her and worship him will never be able to see this.
Clinton used the words “breathtakingly misleading” which was his way of saying Russert distorted the truth. In fact, the Clintons, as is their pattern, are the ones who do more than mislead. They outright lie and expect everyone to believe them. Included in this post are the news items relating to this as well as the document Clinton wrote in 2002 (in which he references the 1994 memo) and there is no doubt what he is asking of the National Archives.
What is in their communications that they do not want people to see? What is it that they are afraid of? We already know they will do anything to keep unfavorable information from seeing the light of day. The whole Sandy Burglar incident is testimony to that so it is no stretch to believe the Clintons are trying to keep information from getting out until it can have no effect.
Hillary has claimed a huge amount of experience based on her tenure as First Lady so it is reasonable to ask for documented proof of her claim. If she truly did wonderful things while in the White House it would be to her benefit to release the items and let us see. She has never run anything, never been a leader in government (such as a governor) and she has never been the head of a corporation or company. If she wants us to believe she has leadership experience, any communications she could disclose to shed light on that claim would be helpful.
One thing is certain, if the Clintons are not releasing the papers it is because they do not help, and probably hurt her. She will release anything that makes her look good but the Clintons will go to any length, including have a surrogate steal from the National Archives. Clinton hurt herself in the debate. The years of secrecy and lying are finally catching up and many will awaken and see what a shill she actually is. Those running against her for the Democratic nomination hope they awaken before the primaries.
If they don’t, I hope they awaken before next November.
As an aside, I wonder if Media Matters will pick this up and expose the lies.
Oct 8, 2007 Uncategorized
They say you can tell a lot about people by the company they keep. Hillary Clinton has told us a lot about herself with the newest addition to her advisory staff. Clinton has hired on Sandy Berger as an adviser. Berger was convicted of stealing and then destroying classified documents from the National Archives.
It seems not to bother Clinton that a man who violated the trust of this country and who should be in jail works for her. It must not bother her because she allowed the guy to be hired. If this is an indication of how a Hillary White House will operate then it should give people pause with regard to putting her in there. It was bad enough to go through eight years of her husband and his den of thieves but to go through it again would be insane.
This is Washington business as usual. Hire the people who have screwed the place up so they can continue to give us more of the same. It is beyond me how there are so few qualified people in this country that we must continue to recycle has beens and thieves through the DC machine.
Of course, this job could be payback for Berger’s deeds at the Archives. It is believed that he stole documents that were harmful to former President Clinton. The documents might have implicated Clinton in the apathy that led to 9/11.
Hillary is some piece of work. She has a husband who can’t keep things in his pants and an adviser who can’t keep things out.