The Discerning Texan

In pondering the recent transgressions of former Clinton National Security Adviser (and John Kerry Political Adviser) Sandy Berger, a number of questions naturally come to mind:

• Last night I heard pundits such as Mort Kondrake, Mara Liason, and David Gergen go on and on about what a "great public servant" Berger was and how this incident was mere "sloppiness"; Question 1 is: if Condi Rice had been caught pilfering classified documents, would the same pundits, media outlets, and Democrat politicians be falling all over themselves to downplay it as they are with Mr. Berger?  Or would instead the NY Times be devoting top-fold coverage to the "scandal" for weeks, and would Democrat politicians be calling for heads to roll?
• Mr. Berger was around when former CIA Director John Deutsch was fired in 1997 for taking classified information home; as a Presidential National Security Adviser (and as a reported candidate to be Secretary of State in a Kerry Administration) was Mr. Berger ignorant of the circumstances surrounding Mr Deutsch's firing, or of the laws regarding classified material?  If so, what does this say about Mr. Berger's qualifications for handling national security matters in any Administration?
• Presumably when Mr. Berger went into the National Archives, he had a briefcase.  If his removal of the classified material was mere "sloppiness", would not he have been more likely to have "accidentally" dropped the documents into his briefcase (which naturally would have been searched upon his exit)?  As opposed to stuffing them down his pants?
• How does the fact that individuals observed Mr. Berger stuffing documents into his trousers and socks at the National Archives jive with his own explanation of "being sloppy"?  I am as sloppy as the next guy, but I am rarely so "sloppy" as to "accidentally" stuff classified material down my pants and hide it in my socks... 
• What was in the document(s) that Mr. Berger lifted?  As Mr. Berger was ostensibly there (at the National Archives) to prepare for his testimony before the 9/11 Commission, did the missing documentation (now "lost"...) shed any critical light upon the anti-terror efforts (or lack thereof) within the Clinton Administration?   Would such material have been useful to the 9/11 Commission?
• What motivation other than embarrassing Democrats at a bad time could there have been for Mr. Berger to take the documents? Why would he risk a Federal felony offense to "lose" one particular memo?
• Did John Kerry somehow benefit from the missing documentation?  (it is notable that Kerry made a major policy speech about protecting Port Infrastructure one day after meeting with Mr. Berger...and shortly after Mr. Berger removed the classified material....)  

This of course does not exhaust all of the questions about Mr. Berger's behavior, or how the missing material might have helped the "non-partisan" 9/11 Commission to shed light on what went wrong before 9/11--but it would be a good start.