[what's up]

Ashcroft said this in April. I don't think he necessarily knew the documents were pilfered. In fact, maybe Berger pilfered them in response to Ashcroft's statements.

But I'm with you in wondering why Berger would have pilfered them if there were copies available.

[stylin19a]

The Newsday article doesn't mention when this "pilfering" took place, but I'm thinking this had to have happened in 2003. Here's a relevant date noted in the article

He retained counsel, and in January the FBI executed search warrants of a safe at Berger's home as well as his business office where he found some of the documents. Agents also failed to locate the missing documents.

Is it safe to assume that "January" in this case is 2004 ?

[Toespi]

"But I'm with you in wondering why Berger would have pilfered them if there were copies available."

Because the originals and the copies do not match, doctored.

[Edit35]

But I'm with you in wondering why Berger would have pilfered them if there were copies available.

From my understanding, copies were not necessarily available to the public (nor had they been leaked, yet), which is why BergerBoy wanted to steal them.

Also, I believe Berger and his comrades in distortion (Kerry, Clinton, etc) wanted to know exactly what was in those documents so they could find the best way to refute any statement or detail which made the clinton administration look bad.

If the Bush Administration does not prosecute to the fullest extent, or find a way to connect this treachery to the dangerous Kerry Kreeps (GET IT on the front page crime) , then my head will REALLY start to boil.

The Kerry Kooks just handed the GOP a realistic picture of how Dems operate (whether in the 2000 elections of this current one) and the GOP had better make the best of it.

[ScottFromSpokane]

Remember, much of what he took consisted of his own handwritten notes based on the documents he was looking at.

Perhaps he wasn't trying to cover anything up, so much as to give someone a heads-up on information contained in the documents. And maybe he knew he didn't have time to take down all the information he wanted from some of the documents, so he just accidentally-on-purpose let them slip in among his own papers. Unfortunately, whoever he gave them to hadn't gotten them back when the Feds came to visit, so he said they were "lost."

Just speculation, of course.

[Howlin]

The documents were taken in October of 2003.