Here is something that I don't get. If Kerry knew about the investigation,which has been going on since last October, why did he take Burgler on as his "chief foreign policy adviser." They had to know it was going to come out at some time or other, whichever side decided to break it. Or did they just want to wait and see if Burgler would be indicted and let it come out that way?
Yesterday Kerry claimed to have learned about it on "the news."
Sounds a lot like Clinton's repeated use of, "I didn't know about it till I read it in the paper."
We really don't know when the investigation started on all of this, do we? We know Berger's first documents theft occurred in October, but from what I understand, Bruce Lindsey was contacted and the documents were returned. We've been told that he pilfered documents on more than just this occasion, and that his home and office were searched in February (I believe). This leads me to believe that the criminal part of the investigation didn't begin until the searches were conducted. Is there a specific date given as to when he became a Kerry adviser? Since he wasn't on the payroll, he could have been advising Kerry from the start.