Reply #134: Why accuse Berger or go along with the attack - as of today?

[peacetalksforall]

It means the Repugs won again, if you think the worst about Berger. They are good if you don't raise an eyebrow of skepticism.

What needs to be known:

What are the rules of the National Archives about note taking?
What are the rules of this Commission about taking notes on documents in the Archives related to the Commissions project?
What was original without back-up copies?
Were there backup copies?
Which classified papers did he walk out with?
Which classified papers did he return?
Which classified papers, if any, were lost?
When did he return them?
Who say him put notes in his underwear or pockets?
Are they claiming that they were documents or notes?
When did they report it?
What is the claim of the National Archives vs the right wing?
What are the claims of the Commission vx the right wing?
If there were no back-up copies, was this made known to everyone who accessed the papers?
Did the Commission or the Natl Archives list, post, or convey the conditions under which the viewing or note-taking was to be conducted?
Did anyone else take notes?
What exactly is the difference between the accusation as it applies to notes vs documents?

Get the idea? We don't know much.

A guy who has been talked about as a VP candidate isn't going to mess up his reputation.

Remember, there are infitisimal government scandals coming out of the Clinton administration that aren't a joke.

The right wing is famous for changing rules and the story.
The right wing is famous for having their declared scandals not hold up under investigation, judicial law, or in truth. They are masters of wolf and implied guilt. They go for headlines whether they are on Drudge or Limbaugh or the Washington Post. They then convince their followers that the lie is the truth and there base buys it all.

Temporary skepticism is the call this early in the game.