And when I say "covers", that can be read two ways!

Sorry for the low blogging lately, and for the problems with the database system. A memory hog has been been running on this computer, and needs to be transferred to something more appropriate for its needs.

I was listening to NPR the other day, as it covered the Sandy Berger scandal. They mentioned that Sandy had read some documents, took some notes, then left, and took a document with him, as well as taking his notes -- both of which were no-nos.

I thought: Ach. A guy walks off with a document. What's the big deal? Sounds like he returned it as soon as he'd realized the error. Drop the matter.

Guess what NPR didn't tell me?

Oh sure, they mentioned the document was classified. And they mentioned it had to do with the Clinton administration. But what they failed to cover was that the document showed how said secret document showed how the Clinton administration had mishandled certain national security issues.

Without that crucial bit of information, the story came across as being about a bunch of people (the Justice Department) who were being unnecessarily mean to a guy who made an accidental mistake.

Instead, it looks a tiny bit like Berger might have been covering his tracks -- one way or the other. Minimally by doing damage control and looking at the document, and taking notes he shouldn't have been. Maximally by taking the incriminating document.

I'm not saying I know what Berger's motives were. I have no idea, and hope for the best. But you'll note the topic here is "Media Bia", and the aspect of the story which interests me, and the reason I mention it to you, is the strangely missing details which would have put the whole story in perspective.

NPR also just didn't happen to mention Berger had removed said documents by sticking them in his jacket and pants which sounds like an awful suspicious way to "accidentally" take secret documents with you. Does Sandy Berger normally transport documents in his trousers?

Just remember: NPR. You pay for it.

For further coverage, I'll refer you to Instapundit, who notes this isn't the first time Berger has done this, and comments:

... it sound[s] as if Berger had documents disappear on more than one occasion, too. Quite odd, and it certainly bears looking into. Closely.

Indeed.