I would still like to know why Sandy Berger needed a document from the National Archive so badly that he stuffed it in his pants. I had almost forgotten that had happend until former Attorney General John Ashcroft, recently on TV, mentioned that it was the "after action report" from the millennium bombing that Sandy had with him. Now, why would Sandy need that report? According to a 2004 National Review article that I missed, Sandy did not just take one copy of the report, but that he took several copies on more than one occassion. Now that's taking a big risk to sneak out material that surely is copied in several other government agencies.
In his recent TV appearance, Ashcroft also made reference to Clinton's Chris Wallance interview, where Clinton stated a plan had been left for President Bush to follow in the fight against terrorism. Ashcroft implied that the "plan" Clinton left was based on the tactics outlined in the after action report. Richard Clarke was the author of the after action report and within the report itself, Richard stated that the tactics used should not be a model for the government moving forward.
So, was Sandy attempting to get rid of the after action report in order to increase credibility of the terroism plan left by Clinton? Was Sandy afraid that Clinton would also have to share some of the blame for not doing more to stop 9/11?
Has our government (both parties) become so corrupt that stealing documents is common place? Has blaming the other party become more important than protecting the American people? Are the perks of being a Congressman or part of an administration so luxurious that people will do anything to get them and to keep them? My answers are Yes, Yes, and Yes.
Maybe it's time we had average citizens in Congress rather than lawyers and professional lobbyists.
##That's my opinion##