Prometheus 6

The news article Oliver and I linked to that said Sandy Berger was cleared has been taken down by the TV station. The reason, apparently, is because the National Archives repudiated the Wall Street Journal report it was based on (I decided to link to a source the Conservatives among us will respect).

The Journal reported in Friday editions:
"Officials looking into the removal of classified documents from the National Archives by former Clinton National Security Advisor 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. ... 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."

The Journal report was picked up by ABC Radio network news, which further misreported the story by saying that the Justice Department had cleared Sandy Berger of all charges.

But Ms. Cooper disputed the claim that she or any other Archives official had said any such thing.

"We really have had nothing to say and will continue to have nothing to say about the particulars of the [Berger] case," Cooper told NewsMax. "I gather that there's somebody else in the food chain that has been talking about the case but it's not at the Archives."

Now, that's all fine.I have no subscription to the WSJ, so I don't know if they've retracted their story; editorial page aside, the Journal tends to vet their sources pretty well.

I also note that, just as the WSJ reported, :

Berger act didn't hinder 9/11 report, panel says
Curt Anderson
Associated Press
Jul. 24, 2004 12:00 AM

WASHINGTON - The Sept. 11 commission was able to get every document needed to complete its report on the attacks even though former national security adviser Sandy Berger improperly took some highly classified terrorism materials from the National Archives, commissioners said Friday.

nothing is missing...

Thomas Kean, the commission chairman, told reporters he and vice chairman Lee Hamilton were told by Bush administration officials about six months ago that Berger was the subject of a Justice Department investigation into removal of the documents.

that if this was so critical an issue it would have been raised six months ago...

The commission staff concluded that no document was withheld or lost, because of Berger's actions, that was deemed essential to completion of the panel's 567-page report, which was released Thursday, Kean said.

"We don't think the integrity of the report is affected," Hamilton said.

and that the net result of all this doesn't change the content or validity of the 9/11 Commission's report

The Justice Department is investigating whether Berger, who served as President Clinton's national security adviser, committed a crime by removing from the archives sensitive documents and drafts related to a 2000 report on how government reacted to the terror threat before millennium celebrations. Berger has acknowledged removing documents and notes about them - some documents were apparently lost - but has said it was an inadvertent mistake, not a crime.

Kean said that the Sept. 11 commission has been assured that they were able to obtain copies of each document apparently lost. If lost documents had written notations on them from Clinton or others, they would have been included in those copies, Kean said.

Copies. That's all

To be sure, it's unlikely he thought he could hide anything from those writing the 9/11 report. Berger's spokesman, Joe Lockhart, pointed out that the Archives gave Berger only photocopies of the original documents — and informed Berger of that — so any cover-up would have been impossible. After learning of the incident, commission chairman Thomas Kean said his staff members checked and were sure they had "every single document that [they] needed or requested."

So how to explain what Berger called an "honest mistake"? He says that in gathering up papers, he must have accidentally taken some Archives documents along with his notes. Those who have worked with him find that plausible. Berger could get wrapped up in his work, they say, and his desk was piled high with documents and notes. "He always kept a lot of paper," says a former assistant.

Now, Berger is done in government because you just can't be that careless with stuff that's been declared classified. His best shot at income going forward is as a lobbyist, and frankly he could have more influence that way than as a government official. But anyone who looks at the facts and makes more of it than that simply has a partisan axe to grind, and you can verify that by seeing who is doing all the writing about it.

That said, I'm done with the topic myself because to be totally honest Berger's fate is about as interesting to me as Bush's, which is to say I'm watching the execution of tactics rather than the exercise of principles.