Sandy Berger- How bad for the Kerry campaign

[W4TEY]

How bad do you think the Sandy Berger [Burglar] thing is going to get for Kerry's campaign. I'll sit back and watch the fur fly!

[N7AAO]

Impossible to predict at this time. Some issues that the pundits think will be huge turn out to be largely ignored by the public, and some that the pundits yawn at are a big thing with Charlie Citizen. Take the old House Bank scandal (remember that one?)... the pundits didn't pick it up till the people started howling about it.

[WA5KRP]

I see it having a tremendous giggle factor.



WA5KRP
Texas

[K7JBQ]

I see it as swinging more Palm Beach County votes to Buchanan.

[N8CPA]

Berger didn't do it without a motive. I take it as evidence that Clinton's malfeasance bridges administrations. I seem to remember a lot of folks on the other side chanting, "What did he know and when did he know it?" about Bush. Perhaps it's appropriate to ask the same about Clinton. What was Burger trying to hide and who told him to hide it?

[k4uug]

http://www.strangecosmos.com/images/content/101472.jpg

http://www.strangecosmos.com/images/content/101471.jpg


Stop Hanoi John Kerry (http://www.stopjohn.com/pages/movies/hanoi-john.htm)

[KB1GYQ]

Likely, not bad enough...

[WA5KRP]

This one is funnier. At least, I'm sure wimmen think it is.

http://rock103.com/crew/pics/washis.jpg


John Edwards, Attorney at Law, PLLC

[WA2ZDY]

Yeah, that car is funny, but . . . what a commentary on lawyers.

I am counselled by "Dewey, Cheetum and Howe."

They haven't helped me much yet, though at least my pockets no longer have holes in them.

[W5HTW]

Probably will do very little harm. I think it will turn out to be a non-issue.

If someone could prove Kerry requested Berger remove those secret papers, then we would have the makings of a Watergate, and that could be far more serious. But I doubt such proof exists, and I actually doubt Kerry ordered it. It is possible, though, someone high in the Kerry campaign did, without Kerry's knowledge (he can disavow it) and that could raise a Watergate type stink. But I don't think it could come close to the magnitude of Watergate. If Berger just wanted, on his own, to take some notes home, and it was not suggested to him by the campaign to do so (or if there is no proof of such a suggestion) this will disappear from the news rather quickly.

Ed

[KA9VQF]

Sandy Berger sounds like something you would find at a picknic on the beach.

[N7AAO]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (W5HTW @ July 24 2004,12:09)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Probably will do very little harm. I think it will turn out to be a non-issue.

If someone could prove Kerry requested Berger remove those secret papers, then we would have the makings of a Watergate, and that could be far more serious. But I doubt such proof exists, and I actually doubt Kerry ordered it. It is possible, though, someone high in the Kerry campaign did, without Kerry's knowledge (he can disavow it) and that could raise a Watergate type stink. But I don't think it could come close to the magnitude of Watergate. If Berger just wanted, on his own, to take some notes home, and it was not suggested to him by the campaign to do so (or if there is no proof of such a suggestion) this will disappear from the news rather quickly.

Ed[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Actually, it looks like this one is gonna have legs... and because of a misrepresentation on someone's part.

Somehow it got out on the news that he was &quot;stuffing papers down his pants and in his socks,&quot; which was not true, but the image that conjures up is enough to get people's attention... which gives the issue more &quot;legs&quot; than it would otherwise have... pardon the pun. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[N7AAO]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KA9VQF @ July 25 2004,20:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Sandy Berger sounds like something you would find at a picknic on the beach.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Only if you can't make it from the grill to the table without dropping them... or have been standing on the grill or the table... EWWW!

[k6pme]

But WHY would a former national security adviser steal and then then destroy documents from the National Archives? These documents supposedly dealt with the After-Action Millennium Plot Review and was attempted before the 911 commission could see them.

What would the Kerry camp have to do with that? That would concern Clinton, not Kerry. I wonder what he is trying to hide this time?

[N7AAO]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KG6QQL @ July 25 2004,21:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But WHY would a former national security adviser steal and then then destroy documents from the National Archives? These documents supposedly dealt with the After-Action Millennium Plot Review and was attempted before the 911 commission could see them.

What would the Kerry camp have to do with that? That would concern Clinton, not Kerry. I wonder what he is trying to hide this time?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
That's probably another reason the issue has &quot;legs&quot;... it really doesn't make a lot of sense given what we know now, so people are wondering what the &quot;missing piece of the puzzle&quot; is.

[k6pme]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N7AAO @ July 25 2004,21:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KG6QQL @ July 25 2004,21:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But WHY would a former national security adviser steal and then then destroy documents from the National Archives? These documents supposedly dealt with the After-Action Millennium Plot Review and was attempted before the 911 commission could see them.

What would the Kerry camp have to do with that? That would concern Clinton, not Kerry. I wonder what he is trying to hide this time?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
That's probably another reason the issue has &quot;legs&quot;... it really doesn't make a lot of sense given what we know now, so people are wondering what the &quot;missing piece of the puzzle&quot; is.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Exactly!

[kc0ebm]

What's the hubbub?

Sandy Burger admitted making an honest error.

I mean, C'MON you guys. It wasn't on purpose!

It was merely an inadvertent mishap.

Everybody knows that when you check into the highly secure archives and start looking through top secret documents, one must be ever vigilant to keep from inadvertantly stuffing top secret documents in one's pants and in one's briefcase, and slipping out inadvertantly with hand written notes taken from highly secret documents.

C'MON you guys! It was an absent minded mistake. He didn't mean to do it.

Yeah! That's the ticket!

Mr Flanagan

[KC7HDE]

This Sandy Berger guy seems to have done this wrong on purpose.
I think he wanted to get caught for some reason only the people that put him up to it know.

Norm T.

[WA5KRP]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC7HDE @ July 25 2004,23:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think he wanted to get caught for some reason only the people that put him up to it know.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
That kind of reach would bust the best of rubber bands. Hell, it would ruin a fan belt.



WA5KRP
Texas

[N8CPA]

Let's have some fun with scenarios. #How about this? #

Berger is a Clinton/Kerry double-agent. #His role as Kerry's foreign policy advisor is a cover. His true loyalty is to Clinton (Rodham). Hillary doesn't want to run against an incumbent Dem in '08. #Berger's job is to assure a Hillary shoe-in for the nomination, by sacrificing the current campaign. #

Of course, he intended to get caught. It would just be too delightful if the Clinton cabinet were really that stupid, otherwise. #

# # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[k6pme]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N8CPA @ July 26 2004,04:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Let's have some fun with scenarios. #How about this? #

Berger is a Clinton/Kerry double-agent. #His role as Kerry's foreign policy advisor is a cover. His true loyalty is to Clinton (Rodham). Hillary doesn't want to run against an incumbent Dem in '08. #Berger's job is to assure a Hillary shoe-in for the nomination, by sacrificing the current campaign. #

Of course, he intended to get caught. It would just be too delightful if the Clinton cabinet were really that stupid, otherwise. #

# # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
CPA, You might be on to something there. Perhaps there was 'damaging' evidence that Hillary was running the place the whole time and it would torpedo her White House bid in either 2008 or 2012. They do after all have a history of losing documents and short memories.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif