The Van Jones resignation raises more serious questions

by Erick Erickson
RedState.com
Monday, September 7th

The Politico has a detailed article on the Van Jones resignation that raises some serious questions.

At two separate points in the article, we’re treated to this bit of White House spin:

a White House official conceded Sunday that Jones’ past statements weren’t as thoroughly scrubbed due to his relatively low rank

and

A White House official conceded that Jones “was not as thoroughly vetted as other administration officials,” though the official suggested it had more to do with the relatively low level of Jones’s job than with the power of his patrons.

In other words, according to the White House, Jones was not high enough up the totem pole to be of sufficient power and, consequently, they did not vet him thoroughly.

But there is a problem with this. According to the last paragraph of the Politico article

There was little immediate talk of possible successors to Jones, largely due to the sense he would be difficult to replace in an advisory post designed specifically for him, due to his past work in promoting “green jobs.”

The White House created a specific post for Van Jones. What sort of low level muckety muck gets his own specific post without being vetted. More importantly, according to Van Jones in an interview with the Washington Post, he had a sizable role in shaping where some serious money went…

Read the entire article at RedState.com

Comments are closed.