I certainly have no conclusions or particular insight into the Sandy Berger Affair, but neither does my hometown paper The Los Angeles Times whose website devotes a scant four sentences to the news that the former National Security Adviser “inadvertently” took documents and notes out of a secure area, stuffing some (inadvertently?) into his trousers. That paper devoted vastly more space to this blog. (Sort of out of proportion, isn’t it?)
Meanwhile, the NYT, isn’t must better, devoting only a few bland graphs, but at least written by their own reporter. The LAT material comes from wire services. I’ll leave it to other pundits to draw conclusions from this silence. [Did you call yourself a pundit? How pathetic. You used to be novelist. Shame.–ed. I don’t have a retort for that.]
The Washington Post has by far the most informative coverage. A name immediately jumped out at me from its report–Richard A. Clarke. He’s the author of the missing documents? Who’d a thunk it? The President’s very nemesis (at least until he admitted no one could have prevented 9/11). Could the missing “notes” stuffed into Berger’s pockets have something to do with Clarke as well? Beats me.
The missing copies, according to Breuer and their author, Richard A. Clarke, the counterterrorism chief in the Clinton administration and early in President Bush’s administration, were versions of after-action reports recommending changes following threats of terrorism as 1999 turned to 2000. Clarke said he prepared about two dozen ideas for countering terrorist threats. The recommendations were circulated among Cabinet agencies, and various versions of the memo contained additions and refinements, Clarke said last night.
Additions and refinements… hmmm… Well, I don’t have anything to say about that except you reap what you sow. The whole 9/11 Commission and its “revelations” seem to have been nothing more than Washington blood sport at its purest, wretched partisans pointing fingers at each other to tarnish the other side with blame for something no one really could have predicted. Neither Clinton nor Bush is responsible for 9/11. Al Qaeda is responsible. But you wouldn’t know if you listened to the hatemongers of Washington and their lackeys in the press. We the people are the big loser in all that. Maybe it’s time for us to rebel.
In the meantime, it’s a season of remakes. You will see on this blog an ad for the new version of The Manchurian Candidate. Could this be Wilson II?
(Possible title for film history buffs: Ants in His Pants of 2004)
UPDATE: On the actual Joseph C Wilson front, according to Tom Maguire who, with Patterico, is doing a brilliant job on this, outdoing the MSM, Wilson is playing a game of “kill the messenger.” The former diplomat blames the press for misquoting him. This is a dangerous game, but will be an interesting test for the media. Will they call Wilson on his lies when it goes against their “Bush lied” narrative? We shall see.
MORE: Our frequent commenter “jerry“, who has intelligence background, reports his sources say this potential scandal is overblown. Could be.
Also, when referring to “this blog” in the link above, I meant mine, not Patterico’s.
IN AN INCREDIBLE UPDATE: Fox is now reporting that Berger’s lawyer acknowledges the former National Security adviser was transporting notes in his socks! Inadvertent??? How about this defense?… He found some pot in the secure room and… in a sixties flashback… stashed the bag in his dirty socks to get it through customs. [You didn’t ever do that, did you?–ed. Moi? And it was notes, not grass. Right.]