February 23, 2007

 

From the Desk of Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton:

 

 

What did the Justice Department Hide from the 9/11 Commission?

 

When the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee released a report in January providing new details of Sandy Berger’s theft and destruction of classified documents from the National Archives, among those outraged by the revelations were members of the 9/11 Commission.  Why?  Because at the time of the incident, which took place during the 9/11 Commission hearings, the Justice Department failed to provide the full breadth of evidence against Berger.  (You will likely recall that Berger, Clinton’s former National Security Advisor, was “preparing” for his testimony before the 9/11 Commission related to the Clinton administration’s failed anti-terrorism polices when the scandal took place.)

 

According to Wednesday’s edition of The Washington Post, Phillip Zelikow, the commission’s former executive director, said, “I think all of my colleagues would have wanted to have all the information at the time that we learned from the congressional report, because that would have triggered some additional questions, including questions we could have posed to Berger under oath.”

 

Meanwhile, Dan Marcus, the commission’s former general counsel, said it was “a little unnerving” to read the report and learn of these details only now.

 

So, what information did the Justice Department choose to keep from the 9/11 Commission charged with investigating the federal government’s response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks?  Specifically, one National Archives staff member reported witnessing Berger take “original uncatalogued highly classified documents,” and wrap them around his socks and beneath his pants to pilfer them from the Archives.  Berger, of course, claims he only stole copies of documents.  Justice Department officials ignored the Archives staff member, who had no motive to lie, and sided with Berger who had every reason to lie.  The Justice Department made no mention of this eyewitness testimony to the 9/11 commission.

 

The Justice Department also ignored Nancy Kegan Smith, who directs the Archives’ presidential documents staff.  Smith admitted she violated secrecy rules and allowed Berger to view classified documents in her office.  Smith later said, “she would never know if original documents were missing.”

 

The Justice Department also ignored Paul Brachfeld, inspector general of the National Archives, who asked them pointedly and repeatedly “to notify officials of the 9/11 Commission that Berger’s actions…might have obstructed the commission’s review of Clinton’s terrorism policies.”

 

Berger is still a player in Democratic national security circles and his political masters, the Clintons, would have been the primary beneficiaries of his malfeasance.  Moreover, it is absolutely shameful that Berger has gotten off the hook with a small fine and community service for the egregious crime he committed.  (The judge handling his case rejected the Justice Department’s recommended punishment and imposed a harsher sentence.)  And it is beyond comprehension that the Justice Department would keep evidence of the severity of Berger’s crimes from the 9/11 Commission.  When the history of the Bush administration is written, historians will note its sorry record of holding Clinton gang members accountable for their various crimes.

 

Hillary’s Hollywood Feud

 

Last week I wrote to you that Hillary now has some competition in Hollywood for fundraising dollars in the form of Barack Obama, a fellow candidate for the Democratic nomination for president.  In just one week’s time, the situation went from bad to worse for Hillary.  On Wednesday, Maureen Dowd wrote a column that contained quotes from an interview with Hollywood mogul and former Clinton fundraiser David Geffen (now a supporter of Obama) chastising the Clintons for their corrupt record.  He even referenced Bill’s adulterous behavior!  Yes, you read that correctly.  Someone from Hollywood called the Clintons corrupt and dishonest.  (The Dowd column is subscription only, but here’s a pretty good summary from Editor and Publisher.)

 

To be honest, when I first read Geffen’s comments, I thought he might have been reading one of my previous Weekly Updates.  Check out what he had to say:

 

Geffen on Clinton dishonesty:  "Everybody in politics lies, but they [the Clintons] do it with such ease, it’s troubling,”

 

Geffen on Bill Clinton:  “…A reckless guy” who “gave his enemies a lot of ammunition…”

 

Geffen on Hillary’s insincerity:  “[Hillary is] so advised by so many smart advisers who are covering every base.  I think that America was better served when the candidates were chosen in smoke-filled rooms.”

 

Geffen on Pardongate:  “Marc Rich getting pardoned?  An oil-profiteer expatriate who left the country rather than pay taxes or face justice?”

 

(Ironically, Geffen was mad about the Rich pardon because he and other liberals had been pushing Clinton to pardon Leonard Peltier, who is serving time for murdering two FBI agents.) 

 

The Clintons, of course, did what they always do.  They attacked Geffen, and then demanded that Barack Obama distance himself from Geffen and denounce his statements.  Obama’s camp responded:  “We aren’t going to get in the middle of a disagreement between the Clintons and someone who was once one of their biggest supporters.  It is ironic that the Clintons had no problem with David Geffen when he was raising them $18 million and sleeping at their invitation in the Lincoln bedroom.” 

           

Hillary is complaining about the politics of personal destruction, and her spokesman has tried to rule out of bounds any discussion about her and Bill’s legal and ethical transgressions.  I suspect Barack will fall into line and his party will remain quiet about Clinton corruption.  It will be “outsiders” such as Geffen who raise the ruckus.

 

It would be nice if the media would now focus on the substance of the issues, rather than treating the back-and-forth as a fun political story.  What about the selling of the taxpayer resources such as the Lincoln Bedroom by the Clintons?  How about some more reporting on the scandalous Rich and other pardons, which seemed to be bought and paid for by bribes, “contributions” and other favors?

 

The news story is not the Hillary-Obama back and forth.  The important story is why it took several weeks for the political class to note the elephant in the middle of the presidential race – the sordid ethics record of Team Clinton.        

  

Judicial Watch Educational Panel: Local Government and Illegal Immigration

 

Communities across the nation are struggling with the crime, financial strain and social pressure created by the illegal immigration crisis.  Despite the severity of the growing problem, the federal government continues to fail in one of its most basic functions – to protect our borders – and local officials and taxpayers are left with the resulting burden. 

 

Judicial Watch is holding an educational panel, entitled “Local Government and Illegal Immigration” on February 28, 2007.  The panel will be held at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. from 9:30 – 11:00 a.m.  It is free of charge and open to the press and the public.

 

Panel guests will include Hazelton, Pennsylvania, Mayor Louis Barletta, former Beaufort County, South Carolina Council Member, Starletta Hairston and Virginia Delegate Jackson H. Miller – all of whom have bravely taken on the issue of local enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws. 

 

Mayor Barletta pushed through the Illegal Immigration Relief Act last summer to hold accountable landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and employers who hire them.  The ordinance also makes English the official language of Hazleton.

“Illegal immigration is a drain on city resources,” Mayor Barletta explained at the time.  “Every domestic incident, every traffic accident, every noise complaint, each time we send our police department, fire department or code enforcement officer to respond, it costs taxpayer dollars.”

 

Ms. Hairston, meanwhile, has also been a community leader in the fight against illegal immigration, spearheading action similar to that in Hazelton in Beaufort County.  And Delegate Miller has been a key leader in Northern Virginia’s battles on this issue.

 

We hope to see you at our panel, but, in the meantime, take a few minutes to read about Judicial Watch’s campaign to help enforce our nation’s immigration laws.

 

Until next week…

 

 

 

Tom Fitton
President

 

Judicial Watch is a non-partisan, educational foundation organized under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue code. Judicial Watch is dedicated to fighting government and judicial corruption and promoting a return to ethics and morality in our nation's public life. To make a tax-deductible contribution in support of our efforts, click here.