Former National Security Advisor and current Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice was accused of the theft and descruction of classified materials related to 9/11……

What we have in America is Tyranny. We do not govern by the rule of law but Tyranny. Sandy Berger is just one example and another is our borders and Illegal Immigration.

Our leaders have sold us out.

Our founding fathers warned us what would happen to our Government if we were not ever vigilant.

My 2 cents.

It is the ultimate progressive hypocrisy that there are two sets of law in this nation now, one for liberals and the other for conservatives. Why isn’t Sandy Burglar in prison?

mcgilvra on December 21, 2006 at 4:36 PM

The “CONSERVATIVES” were the ones IN CHARGE OF PUTTING THIS TREASONOUS LIBERAL IN JAIL. Yet he remains free. What part of this are you struggling with? Liberal didn’t let him go, they sent him in. The job of charging his ass with DEFRAUDING THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES in the form of their representatives on the 9/11 panel, was the BUSH JUSTICE DEPARTMENT’S RESPONSIBLITY. Do you really doubt that if the POTUS wanted an investigation and subsequent public hanging that there would be one? There is no actual legal defense to “hiding documents under a construction trailer”. Riddle me this Batman…since the Bush Justice department had ALL OF THESE FACTS from at least the time of Berger’s deal, WHY ARE YOU JUST FINDING THIS OUT NOW? And why wasn’t the BUSH ADMIN the ones to tell you? ……………BUSH IS AN EVIL LIAR! “When I said Don Rumsfeld was going to be with me to the end of my admin I only said that, blah, blah , blah, blah , blah………. And his goals are not your goals, just look at immigration for a clue.

Fully agree with you on this one!

But having said that, I’m having trouble figuring out a way to disagree with Soothsayer.

Berger, with the authorization of former President Clinton, was reviewing National Security Council documents on Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida, Sudan, and related presidential correspondence. The review was to facilitate Berger’s impending testimony before the House and Senate intelligence committees.

This is a sanitized way of saying Slick Willie DIRECTED Burglar to do what he did. Make no mistake, he was ordered to so. Once again, a Clinton kool-aid drinker takes one for the team. And, if this had been a Pubbie, we would be treated with 24/7 conspiracy theories ad nauseum.

geek

Democrats — the TREASON Party.

georgej on December 20, 2006 at 5:58 PM

YEAH BUT WHAT ARE YOU? It blows my mind that only a couple of people on this website blamed the REAL PERSON WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS. All of the rest of you are nothing but kool-aid drinkers whining and moaning like little girls at the “media bias” and whimpering about how “we all knew”. Well YOU DIDN’ T KNOW, you had an idea, a well founded and obviously right idea, but an idea nonetheless, you didn’t KNOW, because you weren’t THERE.

But there was someone WHO DID KNOW! His name is GEORGE BUSH! See, while you were entertaining ideas of conspiracies to defraud the 9/11 commission, the Bush justice department, such as it is, was writing down the words, “HID THEM UNDER A CONSTRUCTION TRAILER”! And THEN they gave him the sentence that you are now appalled by! The question which none of you seem willing to posit is, WHY? Why the unholy alliance between Bush the senior and his new “Son” Bill Clinton? Why would Bush Jr, having EVIDENCE of CLINTON’S pre-9/11 culpablility, allow them to sweep it under the rug? Even after Bill Clinton angrily asserted that the Bush admin had done NOTHING about terrorism in it’s first nine months? Why DIDN’T THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION OBJECT TO THE PLACING OF JAMIE GORELICK ON THE 9/11 COMMISSION? I mean, she’s the one who authored the “wall of stupid separtation” between our “Intelligence” Agencies, right? Even a moron liberal would see this as a CONFLICT OF INTEREST. What judge would be allowed to render a ruling on a law HE HELPED CRAFT? So, why? NOT A PEEP from the Bush Administration, WHY? Why would Bush allow a Clinton cover up specialist on the 9/11 commission, one who crafted the very rules the commission was tasked with “analyzing” in order to determine, “What went wrong”? Hmmmmmm. When your kool aid addled brains slog their way through that one, you understand why I told the Gay Old Party where to stick it.

honora, jaherer, gregh, drifter, constantine and jetpilot have no defense of this, have nothing to say, are busy shopping or otherwise, or have decided to move on…all at once.

Entelechy on December 21, 2006 at 2:25 PM

Kind of like the MSM. Now that I think about it, our resident libs have been rather quiet of late. Is there something going on that we aren’t aware of?

Zetterson on December 21, 2006 at 12:55 PM

forgot about that fundraising fiasco. no punishment, no reason to change. probably made a few bucks on the whole deal.

DOH!

“Sloppy”, “Sloppiness”, “He was just Sloppy”, “It was just a case of Sloppiness”, “Sloppy”, Clinton…”HA, when we heard of it, we just thought it was funny, HA!”, “Sloppy”…..

No……….. TREASON!

In a letter to the House Government Reform Committee, the lawmakers asked Chairman Thomas M. Davis III, Virginia Republican, to investigate whether there was criminal misconduct in the removal of the classified documents by the Clinton administration official.

Democrats will assume control of Congress next month, and the request for an investigation is expected to be shelved.

Gee, ya think?

A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention….