And from the information it looks even more like a deliberate cover-up of something to me. I'd really love to know exactly what was contained in the documents stolen by Mr. Berger, who was designated to "review" certain files via a letter signed by Bill Clinton himself.
Keep in mind that Mr. Berger was repeatedly advised that he was forbidden to remove any documents from the Archives. However, Mr. Berger nevertheless did so... in a very suspicious manner.
The official report on the whole thing is available via a PDF at the above link.
Here's some excerpts from the WND article, which are based on the official report:
In July 2003, Berger's handling of the papers began to "cause archival concerns in maintaining provenance" after he asked to leave the viewing office several times to hold very private phone calls. Later, in September, Berger once again stepped out of the office and headed for the men's room, but personnel reported an unknown white object beneath his pant leg.
(...) Berger said he had to make a private phone call and went to a desk outside the office. However, the phone line remained unlit, and he quickly departed to the restroom, a location from which he was reported to have recently returned.
Berger made numerous suspicious visits to the men's room in which personnel were concerned he might be hiding documents. He said he "went to the restroom on an average of every 30 minutes to one hour to use the facilities and stretch his legs."
Definitely read the whole thing. There's much more about Mr. Berger's bizarre, suspicious behavior. Mr. Berger had made all kinds of dubious claims and denials which taken together are so pathetic, implausible, so many and so overwhelming as to be deemed by any reasonable person to be lies. I mean, come on- no real-life person, certainly not a former National Security Advisor of the United States of America who's apparently of perfectly sound mind and obviously not an idiot, would be so error-prone and bumbling. Really, it's just unrealisic, the body of claims, denials and excuses for his strange, suspicious, repetitive actions. Unrealistic, except for a comedic movie, such as The Naked Gun, with the accident-prone, incessantly bumbling, slapsticky Detective Frank Drebin, played by super funnyman Leslie Nielsen... or one of the Pink Panther movies with the hilariously idiotic Inspector Clouseau...
In a nutshell, I don't believe Berger's excuses and denials. The evidence and simple common sense doesn't support his version of the whole thing.
Now... I want to know exactly what information was contained in the actual documents he stole.
What are the Democrats trying to hide?
Will we ever find out? Will we ever be able to put to rest our serious questions regarding exactly how serious Bill Clinton was about fighting Islamic Jihad? Was some kind of negligent screw-up ever committed? How will we be assured that the answer is "everything that had to be done to protect America from harm was done" if we never learn what information Mr. Berger stole from the Archives?
And what in Heaven's name was he doing going into and out of the bathroom all that time?!
