James Comey is the assistant U.S. attorney that’s handling this case. If that name doesn’t ring a bell, let me tell you about James Comey. James Comey is the guy who targeted Martha Stewart. James Comey was the U.S. attorney in New York and Manhattan that brought that in — and they asked him, apparently. What’s happened is that Berger and his lawyers in recent months have been seeking a deal, sort of a plea bargain. Go in and just talk about this and say, “Hey, it’s no big deal. It was a simple mistake. I’ve apologized. I’ve fallen on the sword for Bill Clinton. What more do you want me to do?” and Comey says, “No, no. No deal. We’re not talking deal, this investigation is going forward. You may be facing jail time.”
Now, that’s what Lanny Breuer, the attorney for “Sandy Pants” Berger, was told, and the reason is — this is not an “accident.” This is not a “mistake.” This is not “inadvertent,” and it is not “sloppy.” This was willful and purposeful: five trips in there, and a number of documents were taken, but all signs point to real Berger interest in that after-action report dealing with the millennium bomber — and it was written by Richard Clarke, and there’s a tremendous amount of interest in this now, obviously so, and I think the only responsible thing to do, ladies and gentlemen, is to release this document. We have a right to know, the people! We need to know what the big focus of attention on the part of the Clinton administration for this particular document was. What’s happened here, rather than a former national security advisor, sloppy and inadvertent — by the way, do you notice’s Clinton’s character?
“Yeah, look at this guy’s desk. I mean we couldn’t find him half the time he was buried under all that paper.” What’s Clinton saying? “He’s so sloppy and he’s so messy that he routinely stuffed things in his pockets just to clean out the desk, just to clean out…” That’s probably what happened. What a reference! What a character reference. The simple fact of the matter here is that this was not sloppy and it was not inadvertent and it was not an accident. It was purposeful. This was zeroed in on. Somebody — I mean, I don’t know how you conclude otherwise. This appears to have been a mission, not some accident, and that’s what we need to find out why. What’s in it? What’s so interesting about this that it can’t be seen? It hasn’t been found. Burglar doesn’t know where it is. It’s probably nowhere to be found now. We may never know what’s in it unless there is a copy of it.
The New York Times ran something like 50 front-page stories with photos of the Abu Ghraib story; they bury the Sandy Berger story on page 17 yesterday. The New York Times story, I think today, guess what the nut of their story is today? This is so funny it’s unbelievable. This may harm his chances to be secretary of state in the Kerry administration. I kid you not, folks, it may. So, using your point of comparing this side by side with Abu Ghraib, yeah, you’re exactly right. We were told, “These people should have known better. This is unconscionable. The American people don’t treat other people this way. Let’s plaster their names all over the paper. Let’s send them up for trial. Let’s convict them. Let’s put them in jail, show trials and all this.” This is far worse. This is somebody that far more access, responsibility, knowledge, and all that.
But trust me on what I tell you about the words of the U.S. attorney that’s looking into this, James Comey, they’re refusing a deal. They’re continuing to hold out this possibility of jail time and criminal charges. Now, you never know what the purpose of this is because we don’t know all that’s going on, but if this is not just spin and public posturing by the U.S. attorney, means and he said this “This is our life. Secrecy is our lifeblood here. If we compromise our secrecy, we are in deep doo-doo,” and you talk about setting an example? It was what we heard when Martha Stewart actually was sentenced. She was setting an example. An example was being set; same thing may look like it’s happening here.
Now, just a reminder here, folks, these documents that Berger took are said to include the drafts of this after-action review of the millennium plot written by Richard Clarke, and it is known that Clarke’s after-action review identified glaring weaknesses in Clinton’s anti-terror policies. And indicated that luck played a big role when the U.S. barely missed a major attack in 1999. So my suspicion, as I stated earlier and yesterday, is that one of the reasons this stuff has vanished is because it’s embarrassing to the Clinton administration and Bill Clinton personally, who is in the midst of his ongoing, never-ending effort to rewrite his legacy and erase from the frontal lobes of as many Americans as possible the image of Monica Lewinsky. But since this administration keeps doing things below the waist in their pants it’s just going to keep reason forcing the Lewinsky image and there’s not going to be anything they can do about it.