7/21    So, if you were the national security guy for a previous admin and
        went into the national security archives to look at hot topic papers
        that a very closely watched bi partisan commission investigating
        terrorism and our response to it wanted for their report and jammed
        some of those papers down your shorts and in your socks and took
        them home and only fessed up when you got caught but completely
        destroyed some papers that there weren't any copies of would you
        expect to get off by saying it was just an honest mistake or expect
        serious jail time for your criminal act?  I think you're all being
        far too 'gotcha!' on this and need to understand that Sandy Berger
        was just following orders.  He's a loyal servant of his country and
        a good man who made an honest mistake and we should not engage in
        the sort of gotcha politics that we're now seeing.  Free Sandy!  Let
        Sandy come home to his family!
        \_ Seems like criminal misconduct to me.  If someone ordered him to
           do it they should be prosecuted too.
        \_ The whole "sock stuffing" thing is a completely unconfirmed leak.
           Nobody knows if its true.  What I'd like to know is who leaked
           the whole thing, and who is spreading the rumors.  Anyone want
           to vote?  My guess is:
           Karl Rove: .
           \_ I don't care who leaked it. He's already admitted to sneaking
              documents out and he should be prosecuted for that at least and
              an attempt should be made to find out if we was working with or
              for sb else. As for the socks and the actual destruction of docs,
              I'm waiting to see if any of that is true. I suspect a bit of
              "Drudge"-ery here. -- ulysses
              \_ The word is that the same person who compared Max Cleland
                 to Osama Bin Laden is the one pushing the sock stuffing
                 rumor...Saxby something?  Can't remember his exact name.
                 As for the sneaking of documents, he definitely fucked up
                 but right now I can't really see genuine criminal intent -
                 more like negligence.  There isn't any credible motive.
                 Some republicans are claiming he might have been trying
                 to help advise Kerry on port security, but you don't need
                 classified documents to show how badly Bush has screwed
                 that up...
                 \_ He was negligent?  He snuck high security papers out of
                    a high security facility and destroyed a bunch of them and
                    you think it was mere negligence?!  That's incredible.  The
                    port security documents were from the Clinton time period.
                    Everything he was looking at was from the Clinton time
                    period.  If it was a Republican busted red handed for
                    stealing papers like this by *stuffing them down his
                    shorts!* you'd be calling for his execution.  Hypocrite.