[Liz]

Anything (Berger) was attempting to do in stealing documents was done to protect someone else and at the behest of someone else. ....... We certainly know who Burglar was/is protecting. But it may go beyond that.

Nice take, both posters----it could be postulated that Berger was not covering for the Clintons as is commonly thought, but that the Archives theft was to reinforce Berger's usefulness as candidate John Kerry's ntl security advisor---to get something to use against GWB. That possibility became more apparent when it was discovered that the US Pentagon traitor Franklin gave US ntl security documents to AIPAC, and that candidate Kerry had hired Steve Grossman, a past AIPAC president as his key campaign advisor.

Suspicions arose that candidate Kerry was being coached, and that somebody might have been leaking privileged national security information to Kerry in the effort to defeat President Bush.

Berger was serving as Kerry's national security consultant when he pilfered the classified US national security documents from the National Archives.

So, the Berger theft was not as originally suspected (a Clinton cover-up)----but an attempt to compromise the 2004 election to undermine George W Bush's reelection.

Americans need to know the extent of culpability engendered by these activities--- primarily whether our President was harmed ----and whether Sen Kerry and his advisors--- Steve Grossman and Sandy Berger---played any part in undercutting the reelection chances of President Bush through the use of stolen classified documents, and, of course, the degree to which spying impaired President Bush's ability to conduct US foreign policy.

One of the most important questions Americans need to know about the connection between the Berger thievery, and the AIPAC-Pentagon treachery, is the degree to which these activities hurt President Bush and the president's 2004 campaign.

[EagleUSA]

One of the most important questions Americans need to know about the connection between the Berger thievery, and the AIPAC-Pentagon treachery, is the degree to which these activities hurt President Bush and the president's 2004 campaign.
------
Regardless, the question remains: Why is Burglar not IN THE SLAMMER??? We continue to see examples of how CRIME IN WASHINGTON PAYS!!!

[SeaBiscuit]

"So, the Berger theft was not as originally suspected (a Clinton cover-up)----but an attempt to compromise the 2004 election to undermine George W Bush's reelection."

There could still be some incriminating evidence against Clinton (as most of us thought) in whatever Berger stole, but at the same time this is very intriguing, and makes even more sense. Thanks for the posts.

[piasa]

...it could be postulated that Berger was not covering for the Clintons as is commonly thought, but that the Archives theft was to reinforce Berger's usefulness as candidate John Kerry's ntl security advisor---to get something to use against GWB. That possibility became more apparent when it was discovered that the US Pentagon traitor Franklin gave US ntl security documents to AIPAC, and that candidate Kerry had hired Steve Grossman, a past AIPAC president as his key campaign advisor.