re: Robert's records - Why don't they just shred the "bad" stuff?

I was just reading the NYT article "Judge Roberts's Paper Trail" on truthout (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/080705B.shtml) and was wondering, in this case and the many others where the Bush administration refuses to release records that would obviously incriminate them: why don't they just shred or delete the stuff they don't want us to see?

Destroying public records seems like it would be such a petty crime compared to their active role in murder, torture, and myriad felonies here and around the world.

Granted, given the thoroughly corrupt nature of these thugs, there would be very little "real" documentation left! But couldn't they easily have some peons generate stacks of real-looking boring "official" memos etc. to replace the shredded stuff?

presidency has some real juicy tidbits that W and the rest of the leftovers do not want to reach the light of day.

One of the major proofs that Nixon was involved in criminal activity was the missing 18 minutes that his secretary accidentally, in an amazing feat of contortion, erased. The missing conversations could not be produced as evidence in court, but the fact that they had been deliberately erased - the facade of accident fooled no one - fueled public and judicial fury.

Since the public knows the papers exist, if they suddenly disappear, the public will assume the worst. It's like Sherlock Holmes's dog that didn't bark.

the delete key. They can be recovered quite often off of hard drives and often are backed up on other media (tape backup, CD...) as well. I realize we are talking about documents from the late 1980's, but I am sure PC's were in use in the white house back then.