I Have An Open Minded Question About The Difference Between Rove & Berger

[BamaLefty]

Explain the difference in the two. Rove leaked the name of a CIA agent, and Berger was caught strolling off with classified information.

Now, as an American (before Democrat, Republican, etc) both of these situations don't look to rosy.

I can see where Rove's sin could be "worse" because it directly compromised our national security and completely halted all investigations that she was currently working on.

I'm a little confused. Thoughts?

[BamaLefty]

1. C'mon now,

I want an answer and I know that millions of people on here can answer it for me.

[Poppyseedman]

2. Rove may have hurt someone personally, where as Berger was

just covering for Clinton

I have to admit, I find it hypocritical that democratic politicians seem to have very partisan memories just as the repub attack dogs.

Democrats should call a spade a spade as opposed to the repub spin machine who spin their way out of any repub caught doing something unseemly.

Berger was caught, nobody in the Democratic party should shill for him or ask for favorable treatment.

Which sadly was the case.

[leetrisck]

13. No need to cover anything for Clinton

that's just ridiculous. And I didn't hear any Democrats out defending him either. Republicans always, always defend their liars as they are doing now. If the American people will believe that bush wasn't a deserter, they'll believe anything.

[Poppyseedman]

17. You must not watch the news

The political spinners were out in full force defending Berger.

As for Clinton.

Clinton had asked Berger to review thousands of pages of documents related to the millennium terror plot and its aftermath for submission to the September 11th commission. While reviewing those documents, his lawyer said, Berger inadvertently took some classified documents and intentionally took handwritten notes he put together while reviewing the documents.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/04/01/berger.plea/

I'm not real happy when anybody in government gets away with crimes. Repug or Democrat

[leetrisck]

28. So how is getting this information

covering for Clinton - it was their work - was being done for the 9/11 Commission. I don't think Berger should have gotten away with anything and I don't believe he did - he paid a hefty price - now let's see if anyone does in the bush admin.

[emulatorloo]

3. Dunno, understand that Berger was investigated and cleared

Still up in the air about Karl Rove. Is he under investigation? apparently. Will he be cleared? Don't know.

[Poppyseedman]

8. Berger pleaded guilty

Berger maintained that the removal of top-secret documents in his attache-case and handwritten notes in his pants and jacket pockets was accidental. He would later, in a guilty plea, admit to deliberately removing materials.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Berger

[sadiesworld]

15. I don't believe that plea has ever been entered.

The CNN article that wikipedia relies on only states that a deal had been reached and the plea was EXPECTED to be entered. :shrug:

[Poppyseedman]

16. He admitted and pleaded guilty to doing it

His sentencing is postponed until September. So I guess that makes it O.K. ?

If it was you or I, we would be cooling our heels in some jail.

[sadiesworld]

19. Where in the hell did I say "that makes it O.K."?

I'm trying to determine the status of the plea and sentencing. A plea is not entered without a damn firm understanding of what the sentence will be. Do we have a link which shows the plea was entered? Why the hold up on the sentencing if the plea WAS entered?

I just find the timing to be a bit odd. Perhaps a whiff of (at least political) quid pro quo?

I'm looking for information, you're looking for dembots. we're both looking in the wrong place, apparently.

[Poppyseedman]

26. Sorry about that. Didn't mean to imply you were a dembot.

It's a bit difficult to determine who are the dembots and the person who actually cares about the facts.

Sometimes the prevailing attitude around here is repub are all evil and dems are all good, damn the actually facts.

Corrupt government under any guise is still corrupt and needs to be exposed.

I'm always said repubs and dems are different sides of the same coin. It's just how you flip the coin that day.

[Yupster]

12. Cleared?

His sentencing has just been postponed for a few weeks.

[emulatorloo]

20. WSJ - Berger Cleared of Withholding Material from 9/11 Commission

http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/4/5531

<snip>

Berger Cleared of Withholding Material from 9/11 Commission
By Scot J. Paltrow
The Wall Street Journal

Friday 30 July 2004

Officials looking into the removal of classified documents from the National Archives by former Clinton National Security Adviser Samuel Berger say no original materials are missing and nothing Mr. Berger reviewed was withheld from the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

Several prominent Republicans, including House Speaker Dennis Hastert and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, have voiced suspicion that when Mr. Berger was preparing materials for the 9/11 Commission on the Clinton administration's antiterror actions, he may have removed documents that were potentially damaging to the former president's record.

The conclusion by archives officials and others would seem to lay to rest the issue of whether any information was permanently destroyed or withheld from the commission.

Archives spokeswoman Susan Cooper said officials there "are confident that there aren't any original documents missing in relation to this case." She said in most cases, Mr. Berger was given photocopies to review, and that in any event officials have accounted for all originals to which he had access.

<snip>

[emulatorloo]

21. ABC - Berger Pleads Guilty to Taking Materials

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=633517

<snip>

WASHINGTON Apr 1, 2005 — Former national security adviser Sandy Berger, who once had unfettered access to the government's most sensitive secrets, pleaded guilty Friday to sneaking classified documents out of the National Archives, then using scissors to cut up some of them.

Rather than the "honest mistake" he described last summer, Berger acknowledged to U.S. Magistrate Deborah Robinson that he intentionally took and deliberately destroyed three copies of the same document dealing with terror threats during the 2000 millennium celebration. He then lied about it to Archives staff when they told him documents were missing.

"Guilty, your honor," Berger responded Friday when asked how he pleaded.

"It was a mistake and it was wrong," he said, refusing to answer questions.

<snip>

[sadiesworld]

24. Thanks for the links, emulatorloo.

:hi:

[seabeyond]

4. firstly the information remained there. he did not take originals

so what was the sin. i dont know the full story with berger. exactly what was up. i know what i heard doesnt match his punishment, and the last statements he has made. so i cant really give opinion on this, because i know there is a story i dont know.

but really what was the crime. he had access to read the info. he wasnt giving it to anyone. and the original is still in there

as opposed to possibly putting peoples lives in danger, and ending any kind of operation that may be catching a bad guy.

[Toots]

5. Did Berger "Leak" classified Information?

Wasn't the material stuff he actually wrote in the first place? It takes a huge stretch to compare the two..

[sadiesworld]

6. I'll give it a shot.

First, Berger took COPIES of docs that he himself helped create about an event that had already occurred. He did not pass that classified information along to anyone else. At best, Berger committed a no-harm technical violation b/c he was being overzealous in his 9/11 testimony prep. At worst, Berger was trying to shield incriminating info (unsuccessfully I presume as they were copies--and wouldn' Berger know this?) from the 9/11 commission.

Also, please note that Berger was fired from the Kerry Campaign and he has been prepared to enter a plea which would involve a fine and suspension of access to the archives. Oddly enough, that plea has been held up in just the last few days. Hmmmmm.....

[gbwarming]

7. The information Berger allegedly mishandled wasn't seen by anyone

Whereas Rove actully disclosed classified info - both by supplying it to Cooper and by supplying or confirming it to Novak. That's a pattern.

btw, it's probabaly worth noting that the information about Berger was also leaked by administration officials MONTHS after the investigation started, just before the Democratic convention and the release of the 9/11 report. Hmm, smells like Rove.
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/20/berger.probe/

[SmokingJacket]

9. Well, the obvious difference is that

Berger didn't appear to be doing anything illegal with the documents other than removing them from the room where he was supposed to be reading them. He wasn't selling them, wasn't outing anyone, wasn't doing it to get revenge on anyone, wasn't endangering anyone. He didn't do more than "mishandle" them -- they were copies, too.

Taking copies of classified documents for his own purposes and doing nothing with them, apparently, is stupid, yes.

But there is a law passed by Congress in 1982 (Intelligence Identities Protection act, iirc) that specifically bars people from reveal the identity of covert agents. To wit:

"Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified
information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses any
information identifying such covert agent to any individual not
authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the
information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the
United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert
agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be fined
not more than $50,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."

http://foi.missouri.edu/bushinfopolicies/protection.html

The fact that Rove did this to intimidate Wilson, and the fact that it endangered many other covert agents, just makes it worse.

[TomClash]

10. Berger took classified information

and did nothing with it.

Rove apparently disclosed the identity of an attractive, smart, blonde woman with years of training (an extremely valuable but not exactly plentiful Agency commodity) and destroyed her career and compromised an intelligence asset (and possibly her informants and other agents and case officers) of the United States for political gain.

Which do you think is worse?

[jobycom]

11. No one died when Sandy Berger lied

Berger didn't reveal his information to anyone. Rove did. Berger's crime was taking classified documents, Rove's was exposing classified information to the public in a way that endangered current covert operations on highly sensitive issues.

Plus, Berger was a former official, and IIRC, had his security clearance revoked. Rove is a current official. If Berger had been in office, you can bet he would have been fired, by Clinton, Gore or Kerry. Rove is still in a position of trust with a highest level security clearance, even though he's proven he can't be trusted.

[MissB]

14. Why are you even comparing the two?

What is there to compare? I've seen the attempts by the fascists to try to compare what Rove did (out a CIA agent and hurt our national security) with what Berger did.

Why bother?

[Just Me]

18. Rove was part of a coordinated effort to wreak revenge on an Ambassador.

They sought to destroy a man who shed light on the truth about a particular matter concerning WMDs. Rove was player in an orchestrated plan to out that Ambassador's wife, an agent working on the proliferation of WMDs. All those who were involved in that plan SERIOUSLY endangered national security. We are more likely to witness a dirty bomb in the hands of a terrorist.

This situation is a thousand times worse than the Berger incident.

[blm]

22. Berger grabbed his OWN notes that he wanted to copy so he'd have access

to his own words about the millenium terror plans when he testified to the 9-11 commission.

That's it.

Big difference. Berger didn't set out to cover up lies or destroy anyone or leak classified information and destroy a whole operation to track WMDs. Rove did.

[blm]

23. So....do you understand the difference now, Bama? Can you explain it

yourself now with all the info you received?

[BamaLefty]

27. Yes

Big difference IMO.

Remember, y'all have to help me with recent history. I'm only 17. :)

[KharmaTrain]

25. Apples Meet Oranges...Another RW Strawman

First, Berger was looking at copies of notes he had written. Copies. Not originals. He says he mistakenly took one of those copies...not all...with him by mistake. He was the one who reported he had them and was fined for being stupid. He wasn't compromising any secrets since he didn't take those notes and give them to a reporter or leave them lying around. No confidential information was released, no secrets compromised. There's no there, there.

Lastly, at this point, Rove isn't the leaker...he's not the source. He's somewhere in that chain somewhere. So what his exact complicity and guilt at this point is to be determined.

Stay tune.