According to reports from the Inspector General of the National Archives and the staff of the House of Representatives' Government Operations Committee, Mr. Berger, while acting as former President Clinton's designated representative to the commission investigating the attacks of September 11, 2001, illegally took confidential documents from the Archives on more than one occasion. He folded documents in his clothes, snuck them out of the Archives building, and stashed them under a construction trailer nearby until he could return, retrieve them, and later cut them up. After he was caught, he lied to the investigators and tried to shift blame to Archive employees.<quoted text>lol! Hey! Why stop your speculating now?
It's not like you've hit an epiphany or anything. That just wouldn't be you!
Contrary to his initial denials and later excuses, Berger clearly intended from the outset to remove sensitive material from the Archives.
What could have been important enough for Berger to take the risks he did? What could have been important enough for a lawyer of his distinction to risk disgrace, disbarment, and prison?
This story at bottom is about the security of our nation, about what was - or was not - done to protect us from the most shocking and deadly attack on American citizens by foreign agents in our nation's history. It is, in short, as important a story as there is.
Sounds pretty serious to me whatever he took.