… and interestingly enough, since she was a member of the Clinton Administration, testified numerous times before Congress, argued for the seperation “the Wall” between intelligence agencies that kept the FBI finding out what the CIA knew about China’s involvement with the Clinton Administration due to campaign contributions and technilogical transfers, but at the same time, had the effect of the CIA not being able to tell the FBI about the (mulitple) impending attacks on the United States, that that were being planned by Al Queda,….

because it was just a “Law Enforcement issue”, and not a “war”, and we need “nuance” and “lawyering, the courts, rules, appeals, etc.”

Yeah, I got one……

“It’ll it making political hay. But I stopped reading the article after the first paragraph. The 9/11 commission was not bi-partisan it was a joke. As time goes on we will see that the likes of Jamie Garilick (SP) who was on the 9/11 commission was one of the biggest factors in building the walls that led to the intelligence failures of 9/11. Not to mention “Able Danger”

Look deep people, we asking a question of our national security, and when Jamie Garilick was asked why she wasn’t going to testify, and the lead Democrat on the panel, said, “oh, she’s not on the list”……..

“She’s NOT ON THE LIST? We have people dying in the theatre off WAR, that could have been stopped before it started, and SHE IS JUST NOT ON THE LIST??????”

WHEN WILL YOU PEOPLE WAKE UP AND ASK THESE QUESTSIONS?

WHERE IS SHE?

WHAT DID SHE KNOW, WHEN DID SHE KNOW IT, WHO INSTRUCTED HER TO DO IT????????????

If “Scotter” Libby can be tried for a crime when no crime was committed, but Jamie Garilick can disappear into the wood work, what kind of nation are we living in?

Here is a test for all you boys and girs…

Google “Scooter Libby” (not his real name), but check out the results and links….. try it, just for fun.

Google “Jamie Garilick” (her real name}, and see what happens….

Then as the final test, Google your name, and see what happens…….

Interesting, isn’t it?

What happened to Jamie?

Did someone want her connections to testimony erased?

Google any political name that comes to your head… go ahead, give it a try… you will be amazed on the number of links, but Jamie Garilick, she no longer exists.

Why?

Are you awake yet?

Did the DOJ try to cover up Sloppy Sandy Burglar……..?…… Google, only four matches, how many matches did your name get?

Every time more comes out about this, I find myself startled, again. I would really hope that someone could come up with at least the names of the persons responsible for the decision to soft peddal this.

major john on February 21, 2007 at 1:49 PM

I read an article a few weeks ago, don’t remember where, naming a couple of flunkies in Justice that did this. The detail of the article was pretty good.
It was when Congress finally started getting excited about this, and pressing the DoJ for an explanation. This was when the information first came out showing Burglar, as a part of his plea deal, was required to undergo a polygraph.

But why oh why would Bush’s Justice Department want to protect Clinton’s NSA?

Probably because Republicans and Democrats are equally committed to ripping us off for money and power. The Republicans revealing the details wouldn’t serve that purpose.

- The Cat

Too many words in this sentence.

It reads better as: “Can Berger be hanged?”

Much better, don’t you think?

Exit Question: Can Berger be hung around Hillary’s neck in a general election?

Could he have been protecting her, also? Did Hillary sit in on any of the meetings in question?

BS! You can bet that if it any of the missing documents implicated Bush (ether G.W. or W.) in any way it would have been leaked to the press years ago.

Not if it also implicates Clinton. Berger wouldn’t be aware of anything that only implicates Bush. He would have made sure to take at least one document that implicates both of them to ensure that Bush keeps the whole thing under wraps.

If you want to play the “It’s a multi-presidential cover up” game, you could follow that line of reasoning all the way back to Carter. Why stop at Bush Sr.?

You don’t have to stop there. It’s just a factor that makes Bush more susceptible than most presidents. It’s more personal for him.

They all do it though. The most recent incident I can point to is the declassification of Arafat’s involvement in the 1973 murders of two Americans. Ford would have been the president whose responsibility it was to deal with the matter. He never had to answer for why he didn’t punish Arafat because the 33 year old incident wasn’t made public until a couple of days after Ford died.

As to why the JD refuses to follow up, the only reason I can think of is that several career members of the JD would be implicated by what was in these documents and they do not want to bring attention onto the JD’s role in this
scandal.

More like: the DOJ, CIA, two presidents, Socks the cat and Barney the dog on the same document.

Top Clintonesta’s in attendance at meetings made damning notations in the columns by hand. These archival “duplicates” were in fact one-off *originals* in the sense one had been handled by Berger, another by Clinton, etc. at the meetings in question. The notations made clear that the prior administration didn’t take OBL seriously, let him get away repeatedly, put “international law” before U.S. vital interests, and the rest of it.

Hello!!! Berger was an official **Clinton representative** to the 9/11 panel!!! Bill Clinton bears culpability here.

I don’t think we will ever know the truth behind any of this. I think it will disappear down the governmental black hole known as bureaucracy.

RedinBlueCounty on February 21, 2007 at 4:22 PM

Ssssssssshhhhhhh…… that’s what they want you to think.

(whisper…… sssshhhhhhhaaadddddddoowwwwww)

Go back to sssslllllleeeeeeepppppppp, sssshhhhheeeepppppplllleeee, ssssssllllllleeeeeeeeeeppppppp….

You can also be sure that some of the documents that Berger removed implicate Bush 43 directly.

BS! You can bet that if it any of the missing documents implicated Bush (ether G.W. or W.) in any way it would have been leaked to the press years ago. If you want to play the “It’s a multi-presidential cover up” game, you could follow that line of reasoning all the way back to Carter. Why stop at Bush Sr.?

As to why the JD refuses to follow up, the only reason I can think of is that several career members of the JD would be implicated by what was in these documents and they do not want to bring attention onto the JD’s role in this scandal.

I don’t think we will ever know the truth behind any of this. I think it will disappear down the governmental black hole known as bureaucracy.

The more that comes out, the more oddly incurious and unforthcoming does the DOJ seem about the full extent of Berger’s crime.

Or in the words of George Costanza (or whoever he stole the line from): “This thing is like an onion – the more layers you peel, the more it stinks!”

But why oh why would Bush’s Justice Department want to protect Clinton’s NSA?

Your local Truthers can fill you in.

with the taint of Clinton upon him

…. and it was Sloppy!

Shadow government? Seems more like very stupid people in government.

Kini on February 21, 2007 at 2:17 PM

Does it? The number of people willing to continue to chalk up what’s going on to simple stupidity is frightening.

Someone actually suggested it’s all due to conservatives “wanting to be liked?” LOL! Errr … if that’s the case, what’s with the approval rating in the 20′s?

No agendas here. Walk away. They’re all just really nice people.

I’m not sure what is going on here, but our Government seems to have no desire for security DURING A TIME OF WAR!!!

This HAS to be a top down thing… no way even ONE of the leaks (besides Libbys NON leak) could not have SOME consequence if it was not a concerted effort from the highest levels…

IMO Bush is part of the problem here, and I don’t understand why.

Clinton knows all of Bush 41′s presidential skeletons and Dubya knows all of Clinton’s. Bush needs to cover for Clinton to protect his father’s legacy and he will do everything in his power to see Hillary as his successor for the same reason, he just won’t make it obvious.

You can also be sure that some of the documents that Berger removed implicate Bush 43 directly. Berger knows which of the blown up Clinton schemes Bush had to sign on to.

Do the Burglar

Don’t say I never gave you anything.

More likely, the Clintonistas still embedded at Justice are killed the case.

georgej on February 21, 2007 at 1:23 PM

Top officials at the Justice Department are all political appointees, and the really top officials, including Attorney General, Deputy A.G., and head of Criminal Division, are all presidential appointees.

I doubt that a matter involving national security would be decided by career officials.

But why oh why would Bush’s Justice Department want to protect Clinton’s NSA?

That’s the REAL question “Truthers” should be asking if they want to nail the Bush administration, although it would likely nail their side, too, which is why NO ONE IS TOUCHING IT (except HA and a few others).

Hey, did you hear that Anna Nicole’s custody trial is on TV?
Wait, Britney Smears left rehab again?
More cheesecake news from the Government-Media complex.