Support
Donate to Ace of Spades HQ!
Contact
Top Headlines
Vid: "Hysterical" and emotional child Greta Thunberg needs to grow up some
Someone else made this point: Greta Thunberg is a sixteen year old girl. Yet her parents insist on dressing her as if she's 8. Including the little-girl braids. Is this part of the stagecraft?
The CW's heavily-promoted Batwoman -- a character blurbed by the network as "armed with a passion for social justice and a flair for speaking her mind" -- plummets in second week ratings, becoming the CW's lowest-viewed superhero show
Supergirl, which I also hear is a #WokeFest, also tanked in ratings.
I'm going to guess all of these shows are slipping in ratings. They're just not good. Update: Yup. The Flash show dropped in ratings too.
Let's check the difference between #Woke internet reviewers and the audience at Rotten Tomatoes: 69% positive for Batwoman from #Woke Mary Sue types, 12% from the audience.
Julie Kelly discusses the impotency of the NeverTrumpers with Seb Gorka
"Three men and a fax machine" she says of Messrs. Hayes, Goldberg, and French
Of course: Fake News ABC shows Turkish propaganda video, supposedly of Turkish forces advancing, but really of live fire at a Western gun range; ABC News refuses to issue on-air correction
Yes, they distinguish between "over the airwaves" -- which is what makes them a broadcasting operation, of course, and nothing little tweet corrections on the internet, which means nothing. This is what the Twitter Addict Jake Tapper Fanbois don't get -- sure, Jake Tapper will retweet a single post about some issue that hurts the Democrat party or his precious progressive/socialist movement. But these stories rarely make it to his actual show, the thing that counts in his mind, and counts in most people's minds, really, as the "real news," as opposed to some blow-off bullshit on Twitter.
Yet Jake Tapper's Twitter Fanbois are proud of themselves for lobbying Jakey to retweet something. They're very cheat dates -- 2 am bootycalls, really -- who won't insist on a proper date. You know, out in public. Meaning, on the air.
Opinion: The media desperately campaigned for Joker to fail -- and even tried to provoke a theater shooting to discredit Joker -- because the film is largely about the failure and evil of the media
That part of the analysis starts at 7:05. It should be cued up to that part.
I don't want to spoil it for anyone, but without getting into specifics, let's just say the media is as usual very, very concerned that something might provoke violence against the media specifically -- while being blithely unconcerned, or even downright enthusiastic, about provoking violence against those outside the Media Guild.
Oh, by the way, as the media's Plan A of stirring up a theater shooting didn't work out, they're going to their Plan B -- accusing the film of being about a White Man. Which, yes, is now apparently a crime.
Monday Morning Funny: Captain MAGA [dri]
Video of the collapse of the Hard Rock hotel in New Orleans [Weirddave]
Disney goes full Tran-phobic as it commits "Rose Erasure," airbrushing Rose Tico out of its Star Wars merchandise
This is a crime against race and gender. #BeBetter, Disney.
I can't believe Rian Johnson needed someone to crash a car in The Last Jedi, and he made it the Asian woman. What is this, 2015?!?!
#BeBetter, Disney. This isn't who we are.
Flashback: Rose Tico was such a popular character from the very popular The Last Jedi that fans bought her action figure by the dozens
Of course: Fat, weak, played-out Jonah Goldberg -- America's Oldest Tweenager -- starts his first Cuckpatch "Gfile" with... well, just guess, the see if you're right: "Dear Reader (as well as those who opted to receive this “news”letter through long protein strings)..."
It's almost as if he has two thoughts and one trick and has been endlessly recycling them for 20 years. And one of his two thoughts is actually mine. And the other one was cribbed from Claremont writers who weren't properly credited or cited in his book for providing the entire thesis of Liberal Fascism.
Six million dollars. Six million dollars for writing, or rather typing, the "Gfile," recording his stupid podcast (does anyone not have a podcast now?), and for Steve Hayes, a clumsy, dunderous writer, hackishly typing up the links Andrew Egger found for him.
Guys, this really is New Media Done Right. This isn't your grandfather's Internet-Based Newsletter! This is revolutionary stuff that will certainly last dozens of days past Election Day 2020.
Whistleblower Report: AllahPundit, other #SalonHot25 members are "visibly shaking" over Shep Smith news
@guypbenson 13m
Shep's contributions to FNC over the last 23 years transcend the fleeting political passions his departure will stir in some quarters. His sheer broadcasting talent is off the charts he's always cared deeply about getting the story right

He certainly kept us posted on cannibalism in the Superdome.
Children shouldn't have children. And Toothy McBigTits is no exception. [Mis. Hum.]
Jonah's All-In on defending Joe Biden
The thing about a grifter is, they always need a grift. You can't sell your "influence" without being able to claim that you influenced someone, sometime. These guys are either going to get a "moderate" Democrat elected, or claim that a very liberal Democrat is actually "moderate" and they got them elected, and then sell the "influence" they claimed made that possible -- or they're going to have to start selling insurance.
It's that simple: They can see the end of the gravy train coming. This is a personal financial existential crisis for them. They either prove they still matter, or it's time to finally start applying to law school.
This reminds me...the cvcks did have the chance to stop Trump in the 2016 primary, by jettisoning their fanfic bromances with Kasich and Rubio (who had no chance at getting the nomination) and backing Cruz, who was the only one with any kind of shot beating Trump.
They refused. They wanted to 'punish' the base by letting them nominate Trump, who would then crash and burn against Hillary and then come crawling back for the electoral genius of Rick Wilson/Liz Mair/Erick Erickson etc. Posted by: El Kabong

Yes, indeed. They claim to be "conservative" but oddly enough they're always trying to con us into nominating a moderate/liberal. Also remember that the Free Beacon paid Fusion GPS to start building an oppo file not just on Trump, but on Cruz as well. The moderate/liberal wing of our party -- if it is part of our party -- is very well-funded by moderate/liberal New York Wall Street guys who just want a Democrat who supports low tax rates on Wall Street, and will do whatever it takes to stop a conservative.
"The Dispatch" -- reached here through a redirect you might enjoy -- puts up its first, um, emission, and... it's a blog with a morning update component.
Wow. Six million dollars for a blog with a morning update component. Truly this is "a different kind of media" which will revolutionize how we think about news and how we news about thinking.
Can the Owned-and-Operated Corporate Shills masquerading as "conservatives" really maintain that the people of Hong Kong deserve liberty and democracy, but that the people of North Carolina don't?
Can you really be #Woke to the rights of Hong Kong residents and completely asleep at the wheel about the rights of Americans?
Maybe write to or tweet at your favorite Corporate Shill to ask him if he has any answer on this question. They won't answer you, of course, as they have no answer (except for the embarrassing, "But my liberal twitter friends were all on this bandwagon!"), but it might be helpful to serve notice to them that their poor regard for the freedoms of Americans has been noticed.
By the way: How long do you think this current liberal-led bandwagon of resistance to corporate media power last? A week, would you say, before they go back to lecturing everyone about the Doctrine of Corporate Infallibility? Will it be because they no longer feel the jubilation of being on the liberals' side (as usual), or will it because the men who sign their checks point out to them that it is in fact their names signed on their checks?
Recent Entries
The Morning Report - 10/16/19
Tuesday Overnight Open Thread (10/15/19)
Debate Thread Two
Democrat Debate Thread
Plus: Joe Biden Has Ordered the Media and His Rivals Not To Bring Up the Name "Graft Hunter." Will His Opponents Be Sniveling Little Bitches and Comply?

Nannystate Liberal Michael Bloomberg Putting Out Word He Might Jump Into Presidential Race if Biden Continues Bleeding Out of His Eye
Antifa Vandalizes Oregon Democrat Party Headquarters With Graffitti Urging Violence Against Cops, and the Oregon Democrat Party... Defends Antifa's Right to Grieve In Their Own Way
#Woke NBA Hero LeBron James Wanted to Know Why Houston Rockets GM Morey Wasn't Being Punished For Supporting Hong Kong Protesters
Update: Hong Kong Now Burning LeBron's Jersey

Hunter Biden: Why No, I Didn't Know Anything About Energy or Gas, But I Was Totally Qualified to be a Board Member of Burisma
O'Keefe Whistleblower/Hidden Camera Sting on CNN Part 2
Incredible, Frightening Two-Man BASE Jump From Kuala Lampur Tower
Recent Comments
WitchDoktor, as if you give a damn: "Last night's Dem infomercial was not a good thing ..." [view]

Boxx Culvert, Man about town: "Hey Horde. Happy Wednesday. Whoop! ..." [view]

saf: " The Democrats STAGED a nice STAND UP COMED ..." [view]

Pablo: "...buenos dias mi fellow hordistas...como estamos? ..." [view]

Thanatopsis: "In early. ..." [view]

San Franpsycho: "Boker tov morons and tgank you JJ. Did any of t ..." [view]

saf: " Happy St.PUSSY DAY..... celibate celi ..." [view]

Martini Farmer: "Hump Day! ..." [view]

Linn Ridge: "Lots of content!! Morning, all y'all. ..." [view]

Hans O'Lo: "Moronin', Hourde! ..." [view]

Laughing in Texas: "JJ has arrived ..." [view]

Laughing in Texas: "Good morning, horde! ..." [view]

rhennigantx dont californicate my TEXAS: "WTFO? ..." [view]

rhennigantx dont californicate my TEXAS: "675 I'd expect California to take over PGE and run ..." [view]

Colin: "I'd expect California to take over PG&E and ru ..." [view]

Search


Bloggers in Arms

Talk Of The Town with Steve Noxon
American Digest
The Anchoress
Belmont Club
Betsy's Page
The Bitch Girls
BizzyBlog
Blackfive, Paratrooper of Love
Blonde Sagacity
California Conservative
Chicago Boyz
Classical Values
Cold Fury
The Country Store
Cowboy Blob
Cranky Neocon
Da Goddess
Daily Lunch
Daily Pundit
The Daily Recycler (Vidblog)*
Daleks Weblog
Daly Thoughts
Ilyka Damen
Damn the Man
Dave Munger
Dave's Not Here
Dawn Eden
Day by Day (Cartoon)
DefenseTech
Demure Thoughts
EduWonk
Enter Stage Right
Eternity Road
Dean Esmay
The Fat Guy
File It Under
FloridaCracker
Ghost of a Flea
Grim's Hall
Hell in a Handbasket
Victor Davis Hanson
Hugh Hewitt
The House of Payne
IMAO
Instapundit
Iowahawk
JamieR (Classics)
JihadWatch
Just One Minute
Kausfiles
Le Sabot Post-Moderne
Lileks/The Bleat
Likelihood of Confusion Law Blog
Michelle Malkin
Memeorandum (Metablog) Mind of Mog
My Pet Jawa
Oh, That Liberal Media
Outside the Beltway
Patterico's Pontifications
The Perfect World (Discussion Forum)
The People's Cube
New Hampshire Review
Powerline
Protein Wisdom
The Pundit Guy
Q & O
RedState
Reliapundit
Riehl Worldview (Carnivorous Conservative)
Say Anything Blog
Scrappleface
Seraphic Press
Roger L. Simon
Six Meat Buffet
Slublog
Ten Fingers Six Strings
Traction Control/US Citizen
Two Crackas in My Soup
Twisted Spinster
An Unamplified Voice (Music/Opera)
Velociworld
Viking Pundit
The Wardrobe Door
White Pebble (Politics/Poetry)
Whitney Gaskell (Author)
Michael Williams/Master of None
WizBang
Faces From Ace's
The Rogues' Gallery.
Archives
Syndicate this site (XML)

Powered by
Movable Type 2.64

« Sandy Berger's Non-Alibi | Main | The Ace of Spades HQ Guide for Quickly Determining If a Scandal Hurts Liberals or Conservatives »
July 22, 2004

Why Did He Do It?

Let us dispense of the claims, "ridiculous on their face" (sic), that Berger stole codeword-classified top secret documents "inadvertantly."

Even Joshua Micah Cougar Mellencamp Marshall admits that Berger's behavior is "inexplicable," which is partisan, defensive way to say "his behavior cannot be explained by anything other than deliberate and premeditated criminal intent, and that his motives for engaging in such willfully, knowing criminal behavoir are frankly too embarassing and damaging for me to even speculate about, so I'll refer to all this top-secret-document-thieving-behavior under the gauzy, vague, and even slightly cute rubric of being 'inexplicable.'"

On Scarborough Country tonight, reliably partisan Democratic strategist/spinner Lawrence O'Donnell admited that Berger's acts could not reasonably be explained away as anything other than deliberate and intentional. (He also strongly made the case that it was the Democrats -- specifically Lanny Davis of Clinton-defending fame-- who leaked this story, along with Berger himself; I'll have that transcript for you the moment it's posted.)

So let us put claims about "inadvertancy" aside as "ridiculous on their face" (sic). We'll leave such childish things to those who have the right childlike mindset for them, such as Eleanor Clift, Chris Lehane, Paul Krugman, Maureen Dowd, and the entire editorial and reportial staff of the New York Times.

Then: Why?

There are five possible motives. This is all speculation, note; unlike Joshua Micah Cougar Mellancamp Marshall, I don't claim that conspiracy theories are fact until, oh, say, the charging of conspiracy counts against named defendants. But these seem to me to be the most likely candidates for motive.

And let me say something up-front: Although I refer to some motives as "innocent," in fact none of this behavior is innocent at all. "Innocent" is used in a relative sense. Berger did not "innocently" stuff documents into his trousers and socks, nor did he "innocently" "discard" a top-secret, codeword-classified memo that he stole from the National Archives.

Berger deliberately -- and criminally; feloniously in fact -- stole these documents. And then, by his own admission, he "inadvertantly discarded" one codeword-classified memo. He not only broke the law deliberately, he then engaged in the very end-result the law is intended to protect against, to wit, moron National Security Advisors taking top-secret documents home with them and then putting them in the trash, froim which anyone could take them.

Unless Berger cops to shredding or burning the document -- and I don't think he will, as that will be pretty hard to explain in court-- that means he stole a top-secret document and then either lost it or "inadvertantly discarded" it in the trash, where any spy or hacker could find it. And yes-- hackers and spies do engage in "dumpster diving" in order to discover documents just like this one.

It may be unlikely that spies went through his trash on the nights that the document resided there, thanks to his "inadvertant" national-security breach; but then, he was both a former NSAdvisor and an "informal advisor" to someone who may the the next President of the United States. This man's trash is just the kind of trash foreign spies are most interested in.

If we're lucky, then no one discovered the document. But the whole point of the restrictions on handling top-secret information is to avoid relying on mere luck to keep our documents secret.

At any rate. Those lengthy caveats aside, here are the Big Four Possible Motives for Berger's Crimes:

1) It's All About the Comfy Couch. This is the motive most favored by Democrats, because it seems to be the most "innocent" (using that word advisedly, note). Sandy Berger deliberately stole top-secret national-security documents from the high-security area they were kept in because he didn't fancy the chair and desk provided for him on-site and wanted to bring his homework, well, home with him, and pour through it at his leisure, perhaps while watching re-runs of Becker.

This is the most innocent, but it is still blazingly criminal activity, especially because, by his own admission, he then "inadvertantly discarded" at least one of these documents, possibly putting it into the hands of foreign enemies. Or at least acting with willful negligence in allowing that possibility.

But at least he merely jeopardized our country's national security for an understandable reason, to wit, the need to sit his fat, fishwhite ass down on a nice fluffy cushion while preparing his 9-11 testimony.

Arrogance? You want to talk about arrogance? This man decided (under this, the most favorable of theories) that national-security laws just didn't apply to him because he craved the comforts of home and hearth.

And this is the most innocent, most forgiveable interpretation. The rest are worse.

As Christopher "Vincent Coccoti" Walken said in True Romance: "That ain't any kind of fun, but what I have to offer you, that's as good as it's gonna get. And it won't ever get that good again."

2) Berger's Big-Advance Book Bonanza. Simple: Berger stole notes and documents in order to make copies of them, so that he would have source material available when writing his memoirs. While direct quotes probably wouldn't make it into the book, he might hint to publishers that he had juicy top-secret stuff to write about, driving up his advance.

This isn't really innocent at all, given that this theory implies that Berger intended to keep his stolen notes and memos, rather than simply reading through them and then sneaking them back into the files; or, perhaps, that he would return everything, but only after photocopying the stolen top-secret material which, I'm guessing, is a crime in and of itself. Those who write laws tend to write the law to make every possible step in the furtherance of a crime a separate crime in and of itself.

3) A Spy in the House of Moore. This one's simple, and obvious, and already well-speculated about. Berger stole secret documents in order to have the best possible evidence in hand when he briefed Kerry. He wanted to tell Kerry -- and perhaps show Kerry -- all the top-secret information that could either be used to hurt Bush, or could be used to hurt Clinton and therefore Kerry.

I don't know about this one. If true, it's quite bad. But I doubt it's true. As a general matter, no one gets this lucky, and I just can't wrap my head around the idea of Bush getting so lucky as to have his opponent knowingly engaging in espionage against the very government he seeks to head.

4) Security-Risk Study Group. This one's also pretty bad, and I think more likely; so I think this possibility is far worse than the last. In this theory, Berger took documents and classified notes home with him because he had to. (Unlike in theory one, which is sort of hard to believe because there was no compelling reason to commit a major federal felony.)

In this theory, he had to steal the notes, because he planned on sharing them with his lawyers and strategists, who would brainstorm with him about how best to refute/rebut the most damaging questions from the 9-11 panel. His lawyers/strategists/spinners/political hacks weren't cleared to see the documents themselves, of course, and therefore he had to bring them home in order to share them with the Security-Risk Study Group.

Now, under this theory, Berger doesn't plan to destroy evidence or the like, and he doesn't plan to give the documents to some hostile foreign power. He does, however, deliberately share the information with unauthorized persons, compounding his original crime, and in fact committing a more serious one.

How likely is this? I don't know. It seems to be taking an awful risk for some outside imput, but then, all possible motives involve taking an enormous risk with a possibility of 10 years of jail-time for some rather minor advantage.

Except for the last theory, that is.

5. He took the documents for the simplest reason, and the only one which seems to make sense, given the risks he was running: He took the documents so that others wouldn't see them.

The Talking Points on this one are that such motives are "ridiculous on their face" (sic), because (it is alleged) copies of all the stolen documents exist.

But this theory isn't ridiculous at all; in fact, it's the defenses that are "ridiculous on their face" (sic).

But more on that later.

When later?

Next post down later. This post is already long enough.


posted by Ace at 02:51 AM