Some Democrats are already trying to spin the news of the criminal investigation into former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger as a Republican plot to disrupt the Democratic convention.  In fact, if anything, the manner in which the news was released that Berger, while preparing for his testimony before the 9-11 Commission, stole several classified reports appears to have been leaked by the Democratic side.  I base this assertion on two things.  First, the first Associated Press report on the issue deliberately sought to fudge the matter of whether or not the documents in question were copies or originals (something which remains unclear and will certainly be so in the reports that will hit newspapers tomorrow).  Second, if I were a Republican planning on leaking this, I wouldn’t leak it today; I’d leak it a week from today, on the eve of the convention, with Berger in Boston as John Kerry’s senior foreign affairs advisor.
 
This is a serious matter and it’s one, I think, that the media will have little choice but to pay real attention to.  Simply put: this one doesn’t pass the smell test.  First of all, it seems truly odd that Berger, who surely knows the procedures for the handling of classified documents, would be stuffing his pants and jacket with notes (an act he knew to be in defiance of proper procedure) without some sort of reason.  Even more obviously, it’s pretty much impossible to “accidentally” put classified documents into a leather folder and then carry them out of a room.  Something is up here.
 
Later reports, which claim that Berger somehow managed to accidentally take copies of the same document on two separate occasions, make the story that this was somehow an accident, the act of a forgetful man, even less believable.  Same for the claim that Berger somehow, after grabbing a sheaf of these papers, managed to somehow “accidentally” lose exactly three of them.  The claim that this is somehow all just a strange mistake is so absurd that even a majority of the Kool-Aid drinkers on Democratic Underground wouldn’t buy it.
 
That brings us to the obvious question: why on Earth would he do something so obviously fraught with danger?  The value of the secret must be proportionate to the risk and, this being such a big risk, the secret must be equally big.
 
It seems significant that the reports Berger apparently pinched were draft versions of a report on the attempted Millennium terror attacks.  My best guess would be that the drafts must have contained some major bit of information that was not contained in the final report and, presumably, not passed on at a later date.  I can only think of a few things truly explosive enough for Berger to take such a big risk.
 
The draft could have discussed some of the chances that President Clinton reportedly had to kill Osama Bin Laden and turned down for various, legalistic, or otherwise silly reasons.  It’s possible that, for some reason, it might have contained a reference to Clinton’s turning down of the Sudan’s offer to turn Bin Laden over in the mid-1990’s.
 
It could have contained a discussion of the possibility of suicide hijackings of planes that was later deleted from the final version of the report and not passed on to the next administration. 
 
It might have held something that has remained heretofore unknown or which, while not obviously incriminating in and of itself, could lead to startling revelations upon further investigation.  Really, we have no idea exactly what it might have been.  In all probability it was something that we’ll never be able to dream up ourselves.
 
The real test will be how big a media firestorm this creates.  Can you imagine what he reaction would be like if one of the Republicans who testified before the 9-11 Commission had done the same thing?  The resignation of that person would be required immediately and, quite frankly, I suspect Democrats might be aroused to try to impeach President Bush over the issue.
 
This is not a little matter, it ought to be a big deal.  This (among other things) will probably blunt the force of any criticism of the Bush Administration contained within the final report of the Commission.  It ought to call into question whether members of the Clinton Administration cooperate fully with the panel. 
 
What’s left for us to do now is to sit back and watch.