Hmmm. Imagine that. Senior officials at the White House Counsel's Office (perhaps understandable) and "several top aides to" the president (not so understandable) were given a heads-up about the Berger investigation months ago.
Meanwhile, the Post
has a tangled article
about how Archives staffers allegedly became suspicious of Berger while he was reviewing the documents and even started monitoring him. Calling the piece 'tangled' isn't necessarily a criticism. The reporters clearly have two very conflicting versions of events and are trying to explain both -- and point out the ways they contradict. The piece reads as if the authors' themselves are uncertain which version to credit. What's also clear from the Post
article is that not only law enforcement officials but also one 'government source' are leaking like crazy about this story.
The story the leakers tell in the Post story certainly seems hard to reconcile with inadvertence.
Finally, USA Today says
that FBI agents involved in the case didn't think the whole thing was particularly serious.