A Question For The Former Co-Prez

It is being reported in The Washington Times that, as part of his plea agreement deal with respect to charges filed against him for stealing documents pertinent to the 9/11 attack on the United States from the National Archives, former National Security Advisor for the Clinton Administration, Sandy Berger, agreed to take a polygraph test which was never administered by the Justice Department.

18 Republicans from the House of Representatives have urged the Justice Department to proceed with this polygraph test to try to determine exactly what information Sandy Berger stole and what original documents for which there were no copies, he destroyed.

The Washington Times also reports

"Mr. Berger pleaded guilty in April 2005 to a misdemeanor charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified material, including documents outlining the government's knowledge of terrorist threats to the United States. Fined $50,000 and barred from access to classified material for three years, he faced a year in prison and a $100,000 fine, but his plea deal reduced the fine and kept him out of prison."

Lanny Breuer, Sandy Berger's attorney, still maintains that Mr Berger, "made a mistake and fully cooperated with the government's investigation into his behavior. Well, yeah, that's one way of spinning it, if you buy the assertion that Berger's stuffing documents down his pants in an effort to sneak them out of the National Archives so he could do with them whatever he wished is accurately termed "a mistake". I hardly think when it comes to stuffing documents down one's pants one can truthfully and with a straight face be categorized in mistake territory. Add to this the fact that no one except Berger really knows how many documents he stole and how many he destroyed, and I think we've eliminated "mistake" in any possible context from the picture completely. Unless, of course, you're a Clinton or a FOB or a FOH in which case you kind of get used to bizarre behavior being sloughed off as inconsequential.

What I would like to see is someone from MSM ask Candidate HRC what Sandy Berger was so hell-bent on hiding from the 9/11 Commission or anyone else who might want to take a look at the Clinton policy regarding terrorism during his Administration. As former Co-President she should certainly know.

And by the way... isn't there something in the US Constitution that prohibits someone from serving more than 10 years as President? Has anyone checked into the legality of how this affects a co-president who has already served 8 of the allotted 10 year term limit?

Just wondering is all. I think there's going to be a lot of that until the 2008 elections are decided. Wondering I mean.

But for now I'll just stick to wondering what the Clintons and Sandy Berger were so worried about someone seeing with regard to their policy on terrorism. Alberto Gonzalez better find some time on his appointment calendar. He's got a lie detector test to administer.