If stealing and destroying secret documents, stuffing them into your pants and then lying about it isn’t a crime worthy of jail time, why is having a different recollection of events than Tim Russert?
If the charges swirling around Scooter Libby — that he deceived those investigating a crime for which he was not charged — seem familiar, they should. Not long ago Martha Stewart was indicted and convicted, not of insider trading in a suspiciously timed stock sale, but of deceiving investigators into a crime for which she was not charged.
In both cases, is justice being served? Or are the prosecutors just trying to justify the time and money spent failing to prove that those charged committed the alleged crime?
Good questions all, but let’s go back. Why DIDN’T Sandy Berger go to jail for stealing top secret documents and destroying them? Why no trial? What sort of deal did he cut that got him off with a smallish fine and the loss of his security clearances for three measly years?
He had to have given something up for that. What? Abel Danger info? Is that why it all subsequently got destroyed? What the hell is REALLY going on, here?
Tigerhawk writes: Since a full-blown investigation and conviction of Sandy Berger would have been strong mojo in an election year, one has to assume that Berger had powerful leverage of some sort in the plea negotiations. (Speculation alert) Berger probably persuaded the Justice Department that it wanted a trial even less than he did, probably because he would have introduced evidence or adduced testimony that would damage either or both of the United States or the Bush administration.
Maybe. To me it all comes back to Able Danger. We can be pretty damned sure he wasn’t spiriting from the National Archives documents which would have made the Bushies look bad. Very possibly he was taking out docs that made either Bill (legacy) or Hill (upcoming WH run) look bad.
I think the American public deserves to freaking KNOW what was stolen, and why he got off easily.