That's the question of the hour for me. John McCormack investigates:
Former White House staffers I’ve spoken with say they would bet the FBI uncovered much of Jones’s past--especially if Jones truthfully answered their questions. What would then happen is this: the background report would go to the Counsel’s office (run by Greg Craig), who would then raise the question of whether what the FBI found was disqualifying with the the potential employee’s boss. Jones was hired by Council on Environmental Quality Chair Nancy Sutley, but he presumably (and ultimately) reports to the chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel. Emanuel must have decided that nothing in Jones’s background was alarming enough to prevent his appointment.Funny things happen when you put the fox in charge of the hen house. I'd be interested to know what kind of information Jones's clearance gave him access to. Not that I think it will happen, but someone's head should roll for this.So even if Jones is thrown overboard this weekend, it’s worth asking: Did Rahm sign off on Jones’s appointment despite what the FBI must have discovered about his background. And, incidentally--did Jones tell the truth to the FBI?
I’ve sent an email asking this question to Rahm Emanuel’s office. I’ll report when he gets back to me. [emphasis added]
If the Obama administration becomes temporarily sane and jettisons Mr. Jones he might consider going into comedy. Maybe he could share a bill with my favorite comedienne, the lovely Wanda Sykes. If he doesn't end up in jail for lying under oath, that is. See more of his material here. He's got a million of 'em.
Comments welcome.
Linked by Doug Ross, Michelle Malkin, and RS McCain
Most recent posts here.
6 comments:
I am a first time reader. At least you did not call Van Jones a "czar". But why does he need to resign? You never gave an explanation, nor have you commented on the job he was hired for. Has he created 'green jobs", etc? And as a person who has gotten a security clearance before, I know for a fact that it is a very detailed background check, including calling neighbors, talking to my family and parents, my high school classmates, even my fellow Army mates. Apparently none his "associations" disqualified him.
Finally, I notice your blog has a lot if pictures. None of a person of color. You could not find a classic/vintage picture of a person of color. Or you don't know any, never listen to any music, watch TV, go to the movies, or entertained by people of color. Such a limited life. As far as I can read this blog, the only person of color you know is Mr. Jones
Johnny One Note!
"racism here, racism there, racism-racism everywhere"
Seems that you fools would acknowledge that one of the consequences of ascension for minorities and others historically under represented in leadership positions, is the natural criticism and disagreement that follows regarding partisan disagreement.
That's not meant to suggest that some bigotry and racism doesn't exist on ALL sides, however one undermines their own credibility when the default response to any critical commentary is "racism".
This isn't 1963 Johnny. Grow the hell up!
Oh dear. Now I'm a racist because I think Van Jones most likely failed his security clearance and was given a pass by someone? And because I don't have pictures of black people on my sidebars? You've got to be kidding.
I guess you missed my music links (click on Sinatra pic) and mp3 clips. I've got links to Aretha, Ella, Johnny Hartman, Count Basie, Joe Williams, Nat King Cole, Stevie Wonder, Marvin Gaye and Tammy Terrell, Denyce Graves, Chubby Checker, and more buried somewhere among the posts. How about Keely Smith -- she's part Cherokee. Does that count? If anything, I'm biased against caucasian music. But I didn't I was supposed to judge by race.
You didn't see my Father's Day post either.
Oops. Last sentence was supposed to read:
But I didn't know I was supposed to judge by race.
buckjohnson
One good reason Van Jones should be fired is that billions of tax payer dollars should not be controled by someone who does not have enough sense to not fall for wacko political ideologies like communism and trutherism. And, you might be surprised to learn that the validity of any ideas expressed in the blog is totally unaffected by your pronouncements about the racial make in the art work. To even bring up race in such a context only shows that you're trying to use it as a weapon. You are plainly more interested in attacking and tearing down than in a reasoned discussion. That's OK. It's a normal over reaction when you feel threatened. But you do not have to live in fear. It is possible to become more rational. I would recommend Mark Steyn twice a week and Victor Davis Hanson once a week to start out. Then as you're feeling more stable and rational you can begin to add Glenn Beck. Of course this should all be supplemented daily with reading of the Constitution, the Federalist Papers and maybe a treatise by Locke. Edmund Burke, Hayek, Russell Kirk and william F. Buckley, Jr. never hurt.
Funny things happen when you put the fox in charge of the hen house.
Yup, idiots like you on the right, who don't think for yourselves, think that as long as you scream and throw tantrums you'll get some power back for the RepugnanThuglicans.
Post a Comment