According to the WSJ article the purloined documents were after action reports or evaluations by Richard Clarke, which delineated the success or failure of the Clinton security policy for the millennium and recommended changes. So, may we assume that the Kerry plan, as laid out here, closely approximated those recommendations?
I think the bottom line will be what Clarke was saying: We told them (Bush Team) , we told them everything, terrorists were our top priority and they ignored it.
But in fact, using Ashcroft's testimony, they themselves ignored the terrorists already here, they did nothing and DID NOT pass on the pertinent information to the Bush administration. In other words, they lied to the commisssioners and during the transition. And I'd say that's treason!!