Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: John Carragher who wrote (56442)	7/27/2004 9:45:49 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (2) of 794159

True, Berger should not have been allowed to leave the building with top secret documents, even ones which were archived. But then, the archivists at first did not realize what he was doing, until they went to put the documents back and saw that some were missing. They then called the various authorities, and set up a sting operation, including surveillance, possibly even recording the conversations he was having on his cell phone when he made the archive personnel leave the room. No doubt Berger's lawyer will argue that was illegal. Interesting legal issue, can you set up clandestine microphones in a government building and keep them running without getting a wire tap authorization? I would argue that it's just like surveillance cameras, part of security. Do you have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the National Archives? This is one of those situations where one wishes to have been able to be a "fly on the wall" just to watch Berger secreting documents on his person.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next