On Fox News Sunday this morning, Juan Williams tried to downplay Sandy Berger’s theft of documents from the National Archives by stating that there were “other copies” available. This was succinctly retorted by William Kristol, who noted that these were the only copies with sidebar notes by Berger, and other Clinton White House staffers. But, what I find even more interesting, is Rep. Christopher Cox’s critism in Thursday’s Wall Street Journal, concerning Berger’s conflict of interest:

While many are concerned with which laws may have been broken, a more fundamental question is why Mr. Berger, by any objective reckoning a subject of the Commission’s investigation, was reviewing sensitive materials in order to determine which Clinton administration documents would be provided to the Commission. The destroyed documents reportedly contained more than two dozen recommendations for action against Osama bin Laden and his al Qaeda network–a measuring stick for the Clinton administration’s response.

The fact is that Sandy Berger, like so many of those involved in the Commission’s investigation such as high-level Clinton administration official Jamie Gorelick, had an overpowering conflict of interest.