In what can only be described as a deafening silence from the left, Sandy Berger has quietly agreed to plead guilty to destroying National Security Documents.  These were the documents he wanted to hide from the 9-11 commission that showed the culpability of the Clinton Administration in not pursuing Terrorism on his watch.

This is also why Clinton originally said he let Osama Bin Laden go 3 different times (when he thought he documents would be made public), before he retracted his statements and said he 'mis-spoke' (and people complain about Bush's mis-statements?).

But just as importantly, his plea makes clear the following observation:

The deal's terms make clear that Berger spoke falsely last summer in public claims that in 2003 he twice inadvertently walked off with copies of a classified document during visits to the National Archives, then later lost them.

So not only has Sandy Burglar admitted to destruction of public documents, but he has also admitted to lying!  SHOCK!  And it was not even about sex?

So what is the excuse now for the deafening silence?  Is the next argument that no one should be forced to admit they did something wrong?  First we had sex that was not sex, and now a crime that must not be a crime!

It has been over 4 years since the Clinton Mafia left the whitehouse, and yet they are continuing to build upon their legacy.  A legacy of lies and crimes unmatched in the recent annals of the presidency.  WHile some may come here and argue that all presidents are crooked (the lame excuse that everyone does it so why cant I), or that some are even worse crooks (yet none were impeached or convicted and the only known one had the honor to resign), or some other lame excuse, I doubt many will come and say "yes it was wrong.  It was wrong for him to do it, and wrong for Clinton to subborn it".

To some, apparently, a crime is only a crime when it is done by some uncaring, unfeeling nasty republican.  Evidence be damned.  It is the accusation against them that counts, not any smoke or fire.