To: edzuk
Do you suppose maybe Berger was seeking protect Berger. Maybe it's no more complicated than it would appear on the surface. He wanted to get rid of evidence of something he did while the Clintons were in office.
I am not suggesting he would not, or did not, do it on behalf of the Clintons, but I also think it could be that he was acting in his own self-interest. It certainly wouldn't be the first time someone has reverted to the basic human nature to look out for one's self!
To: jwparkerjr
Watch an apellate judge nomination named Hillman from NJ. He was the prosecutor who pled out both Berger and Clinton. We should make a Harriet Myers type stink about him.
13 posted on
01/18/2007 6:51:10 AM PST by
ClaireSolt
(Have you have gotten mixed up in a mish-masher?)
To: jwparkerjr
I doubt Berger to take a pee without checking with the Clintons.
This has Bubba and the Beasts' fingerprints all over it. (perhaps literally)
19 posted on
01/18/2007 7:01:59 AM PST by
Churchillspirit
(We are all foot soldiers in this War On Terror.)
To: jwparkerjr
...maybe Berger was seeking protect Berger. I tend to agree. Maybe we should just apply Occam's razor to this.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson