Sandy Berger has given up his license to practice law rather than have his theft of materials at the National Archives scrutinized. One portion of our past has been wrested from the public's control:
We don't know with any certainty what is missing, which papers exactly are gone, or what notes - and whose notes - may have been on them. Berger's lawyer asserted that the 9/11 Commission had copies of all the material Berger stole and destroyed. But if that is so, why would Berger risk so much to destroy it and be so keen today on avoiding any real inquiry into what he did?
Berger had access to Archives documents that could be critical to understanding what information the Clinton Administration had, what options it considered, and what decisions it took on these sensitive subjects. In addition to primary documents, Berger had access to copies, and the only plausible reason for taking five copies of a single memo is that some had original notes on them from key officials, maybe from Berger or President Clinton.
We don't know exactly what portion of the past is now under his control (and the control of whoever he took the spear for), and hence we don't know what type of future we will get.
Pity our press has no curiosity about this.
