Berger Flashback
What follows is something I posted in July regarding the Berger document theft. I posted a link to it below, but after re-reading it, decided to re-post it in full here just to make my point about what an incredibly serious offense Berger committed.
One thing I have not discussed in detail, and have not seen discussed much elsewhere, is that the offense goes beyond the theft of the documents, but includes the act of obstructing the investigation of the 9/11 Commission.
Here is my take on the matter from July, based on my personal experience dealing with sensitive documents:
I know that the impending commencement of the Democrats’ convention will all but obliterate further media attention and discussion of this subject, but what follows is something I have been doing a lot of thinking about ever since the Sandy Berger story broke. For all the justified outrage over the lack of attention the story has received from the mainstream media, my outrage and dumbfounded wonder is based on the actions of Berger rather than how those actions have been covered or even what facts documented in the purloined documents could be worth breaking the law to hide.-- Lorie ByrdIn my former life, before I became a full-time-mom, I worked as a paralegal. For much of those ten years, I was a custodian of a depository of documents from a failed financial institution that was involved in complex, multi-party litigation. I was responsible, along with those working with me, for securing and cataloging the documents, working with the lawyers at my firm to identify and pull “privileged” documents, and setting up a process to produce the documents for discovery to dozens of visiting attorneys. I worked onsite with the documents producing them for discovery for just over a year, and then oversaw the moving of the documents and eventual transfer of them to the custody of the FBI who was investigating related matters. I was the primary individual responsible for the location and condition of those documents for approximately eight years and I took the responsibility very seriously.
The documents I dealt with, although many financial in nature, and all potential evidence in multi-million dollar lawsuits, were not top secret. They were not classified. There was never any remote possibility that if a document was lost or stolen or inadvertently released to an unauthorized agent, that anyone’s life would be in danger. There was no possibility that the security of the nation would be in any way jeopardized. But I still was very diligent in my handling of the documents and in the way they were allowed to be reviewed and copied. For that reason, I cannot imagine any of the lawyers I worked with, on our side or opposing counsel, stuffing documents into their briefcases without permission, much less their pants.
The fact that someone who was responsible, in large part, for the security of the nation, would remove classified documents (whether they be copies or originals) without permission, on several occasions, is difficult for my brain to process. Look, anyone I ever worked with can attest to the fact that I had one of the messiest desks and offices a person could have, but I never stuffed documents anywhere they didn’t belong. Certainly not in my pants. If the former National Security Advisor has such disregard for the integrity of documents and the rules and laws pertaining to their treatment, what can be said for his regard for the security of the nation and the safety those rules applying to classified documents protects? And what can be said about that former NSA’s boss who regards the entire matter as a joke? I think we can rightly conclude that for many in that administration, that is exactly what national security was – a joke.