As reported two days agao, not only did former Clintinonista Sandy Berger walked out of the National Archives with classified documents in his portfolio, briefcase and stuffed into the pockets of his pants and jacket, we know learn that he had his socks stuffed full of handwritten notes, presumably based on the documents he was reviewing or possibly stole.
We also learn that despite standard security procedures, Berger was continually left alone by the workers in the Archives to "make private telephone calls" and some such. Archive security procedures state that no one is ever to be left alone with any documents --- a security person must be present at all times.
What was he doing? What was he thinking? What the hell did he have to hide?
And yet, the word "inadvertant" keeps popping up. A favorite Clintonite word. To a Clintonite, "inadvertant" means you meant not to get caught, but you did. The ex-Clintonnites are coming out of the woodwork to defend litle Sammy and all have the same thing to say "I can't believe he actually meant to do something like that, it's must have been an accident. I had to be inadvertant."
Sandy Berger committed a crime. He stole valuable, historical documents that might have shed light either on his bosses falures or his own. He took steps to conceal his crime, stuffing documents in his clothing believing he would not get caught. He made phone calls (to whom, I wonder? Clinton? John Kerry? 9/11 commission members?), and the records of those calls must be made public. The only good news was that it was Archive security people who after allowing the idiot to be left alone with all this stuff, managed to find it on him before he left. For once, a government worker may have done his/her job properly.