# Sandy Berger to plead guilty on document stealing charge. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 1, 2005, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandy-berger-to-plead-guilty-on-document-stealing-charge/297172 "2005-04-01T03:09:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2005, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandy-berger-to-plead-guilty-on-document-stealing-charge/297172/61 "2005-04-05T02:20:50Z")
> [@furt](#): > > Because he’s a member of the political class. > > I’m with **PartiotX** on this – it’s not a D vs. R thing so much as it is a “he’s one of us.” If he was a high-ranking Pub he’d have gotten a similar wrist-slap (though I daresay the media would have talked about it a lot more). If it was joe Average of any political stripe, he’d be in jail. As Berger should be. That’s one possibility. Another is that the Pubs (who effectively control the Justice Department at present) have some inkling of what information Berger destroyed and they, for their own reasons, want it kept under wraps just as badly as he did. > [@New Iskander](#): > > Obviously, missing copies contained a few hand-scribbled notes, such as these: > > “S out WMD, lift sanctions, troops home.” BC > > “WTF? Sandy, keep BC happy. Overruled.” bL > > So, how many US troops Sandy Berger killed? All of them. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2005, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandy-berger-to-plead-guilty-on-document-stealing-charge/297172/62 "2005-04-05T02:21:57Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > Sorry, but that’s not true. The ability to view classified material is entirely determined by two things, security clearance level and the need to know the information. > > If I had a clearance for a job spying on Jibjabistan, for example, I couldn’t use said clearance to request the files for the secret alien landings at Roswell. Cite? (I know, I know, you could give me a cite but then you’d have to kill me . . .) ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2005, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandy-berger-to-plead-guilty-on-document-stealing-charge/297172/63 "2005-04-05T02:37:57Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > :dubious: Hey, waittaminit. How do you know the documents in question were not stuff Berger was supposed to be looking at in the course of his research for the 9/11 Commission? You got a cite for that? 'Cos that hasn’t come up in this thread yet nor in any news reports I’ve seen on the case. > > Besides, I don’t think the criterion here is official Need To Know – if you have a certain level of official security clearance, you can lawfully look at anything not requiring a higher level of clearance. No, no, no. I had a Top Secret SI. I still was not allowed to see anything that did not directly pertain to my job, and was necessary to do that job. In private industry I had Secret. Again, I could not look at anything that was not required to do my job. In any case, even the need to know and the right clearance level does not allow you to remove a single thing from the secure area, except under the strictest controls. Even the President himself is subject to these rules. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2005, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandy-berger-to-plead-guilty-on-document-stealing-charge/297172/64 "2005-04-05T03:09:56Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Cite? > > (I know, I know, you could give me a cite but then you’d have to kill me . . .) > **[About Department of Defense Security Clearances](https://www.thebalancecareers.com/security-clearance-secrets-3331997)** > > What happens when you need a military security clearance? Not everyone who works for the government has or needs one, and not everyone qualifies. > [@](#): > > I should mention here that merely having a certain level of Security Clearance does not mean one is authorized to view classified information. To have access to classified information, one must possess the necessary two elements: A level of Security Clearance, at least equal to the classification of the information, AND, an appropriate “need to know” the information in order to perform their duties. Just because I have a SECRET Clearance, would not give me access to ALL Secret Information in the military. I would need to have a specific reason to know that information, before I could be granted access. I could give you others, but this page is pretty comprehensive and accessible for people not trained in these arcane matters. Scroll backwards and forwards for more. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2005, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandy-berger-to-plead-guilty-on-document-stealing-charge/297172/65 "2005-04-05T15:05:32Z")
Thank you for the cite, Mr. Moto. I want to emphasize too, that where the cite talks about background checks, they really do interview your friends, neighbors, relatives, etc, and they do go back 5 to 10 years depending on the clearance level. Even something as common as having too many speeding tickets can get your clearance denied. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 5, 2005, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandy-berger-to-plead-guilty-on-document-stealing-charge/297172/66 "2005-04-05T22:53:53Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > You can be sure that I am not being overly dramatic. I was in the Army, the Army Security Agency to be exact. It is the Army’s counterpart to the National Security Agency. We each, when we had reached a certain rank and level of trust, would be assigned guard duty. At the start of our tour we were given a written list of the people authorized to be inside the secure area (the vault is what we called it). Our orders were that nobody except those on the list were allowed anywhere near the door (which was secure). Anyone on the list had to produce ID, even though we knew them. If someone tried to get in who didn’t belong, our orders were to tell them to halt, and then detain them. If they failed to obey our order to halt, we were to shoot them. If we observed anyone carrying anything out of the secure area, the orders were the same. Order him to halt. If he does not halt immediately, shoot him. It didn’t matter if it was Corporal Smith, the base commander, or anyone else. We were also instructed that even though we were the guards, and we had the .45, we were not to go near the door ourselves either. Yes, the government does take it that seriously. Having never been inside the vault, I could reasonably assume someone in there was armed too, just in case I should fail to follow my orders. My father was in the Air Force and worked for NSA in the '70s. He often had to courier classified documents from Fort Meade to the Pentagon and back. He was not required to put them in a locked briefcase handcuffed to his wrist, he just put them in his coat pocket. But he was always required, when carrying such documents, to carry a .38 in a shoulder holster. And presumably (though he hasn’t mentioned that) he had orders to kill someone before allowing the documents to be taken off his person. My brother pointed out something interesting about this case: Berg has been stripped of his security clearance for three years – the exact period that would allow him to take a high-security post in the next administration, should it be a Democratic one. Either **furt** is right about the “one of us” mentality, or dude’s got one brilliant lawyer! ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [April 6, 2005, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandy-berger-to-plead-guilty-on-document-stealing-charge/297172/67 "2005-04-06T17:50:35Z")
“If I were king”, he would have a very prominent “letter of direction” or something in his personnel files or work record or whatever political cronies have. It would be a directive that Berger shall never have any clearance whatsoever. Permanently denied, in advance of any request. But then, “if I were king” he would have faced serious charges for breach of security and failure to follow proceduer, not just a slap on the wristh. ---
**Author:** ![manhattan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manhattan/32/7_2.png) [@manhattan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/manhattan)\ **Post date:** [April 8, 2005, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandy-berger-to-plead-guilty-on-document-stealing-charge/297172/68 "2005-04-08T17:37:21Z")
> [@Sam Stone](#): > > To be honest, I thought it was accepted fact that there were handwritten notes in the margins, because I keep seeing references to them all over the place. But for the life of me, I can’t find an official source or mainstream newspaper that says there were handwritten notes in the margins of the copies. It was leaked to the press back in July, by whom I know not. But the [editorial page of the _Wall Street Journal_](http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110006534) (email registration may be necessary – they don’t spam you), not known for being easy on members of the Clinton administration, is reporting that prosecuter in the case asserts that there were no marginalia; indeed, that the various versions were printed at the archives from a computerized version of each draft of the document. Based on this I believe the outcome of the case to be just. As to why he’d destroy the documents? Same reason Martha Stewart altered her records and altered them back. When people get caught doing something wrong, even just a little wrong, they often turn temporarily stupid and do something wronger in the process. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandy-berger-to-plead-guilty-on-document-stealing-charge/297172.md?page=3)