Secretive Bush WH announces nominees before background check is finished

[underpants]

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2004/12/12/white_house_says_kerik_didnt_disclose_potential_problems?pg=2

A full FBI field check of a nominee is sometimes completed in advance of Cabinet picks. Often, as in Kerik's case, it is not. A former administration official familiar with the appointments process said that Bush's system has produced remarkably few problems but that "perceived or actual political pressure to get appointments done quickly" often makes it impossible to do as much checking as White House lawyers would like.

Bush, White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr., political adviser Karl Rove, and Dina Powell, head of the presidential personnel, are usually the only ones outside the counsel's office aware of the selections. Once the pick is made, the counsel's office vets the candidate, asking scores of questions about personal relationships and finances, professional dealings, and criminal or improper behavior. Records are reviewed and potential problems investigated. If nothing problematic arises, Bush makes the announcement -- often before the FBI has conducted its background check.

The FBI check is completed before the Senate confirms each pick. The efficacy of Bush's process is in the results, they say: Kerik is only the second nominee in two terms to be withdrawn. Bill Clinton, by comparison, had two attorney general nominees forced out and six total in his two terms.

[datasuspect]

1. i remember reading a story

when the "war" first started that they were staffing key civilian posts in iraq with the children of politically-connected gop types.

if i'm not mistaken, it was in the WSJ and they detailed the story of a 23 year old guy with no accounting background who oversaw some financial post in the coalition-government at the time.

he was fast-tracked through and sent to iraq, with no background check, simply on the basis of his father's relationship to dubya.

the thing to remember is this: this is an imperial presidency. dubya has a sense of entitlement as it concerns the office of the president - it is not a duty or trust to him, he thinks it is his birthright. that's why they don't like being questioned.

[tech3149]

2. You remember correctly

That story detailed the rapid turnover of many young appointees with no real word experience. The CPA was totally ineffective.

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. And it seems to be passing on to his offspring.

I hear they don't pay their restaurant bills nor tip. How can the media allow this to go unreported? What kind of message does that send to other Americans?

Bush thinks he's a king ordained by the Church of England. This is not normal.

[seafan]

6. Here is that article. It's a keeper.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A48543-2004May22?language=printer

<snip>

When the U.S. government went looking for people to help rebuild Iraq, they had responded to the call. They supported the war effort and President Bush. Many had strong Republican credentials. They were in their twenties or early thirties and had no foreign service experience.

<snip>

They had been hired to perform a low-level task: collecting and organizing statistics, surveys and wish lists from the Iraqi ministries for a report that would be presented to potential donors at the end of the month. But as suicide bombs and rocket attacks became almost daily occurrences, more and more senior staffers defected. In short order, six of the new young hires found themselves managing the country's $13 billion budget, making decisions affecting millions of Iraqis.

<snip>

For months they wondered what they had in common, how their names had come to the attention of the Pentagon, until one day they figured it out: They had all posted their resumes at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative-leaning think tank.

<snip>

When Ledeen's group showed up at the palace -- with their North Face camping gear, Abercrombie & Fitch camouflage and digital cameras -- they were quite the spectacle. For some, they represented everything that was right with the CPA: They were young, energetic and idealistic. For others, they represented everything that was wrong with the CPA: They were young, inexperienced, and regarded as ideologues.

Several had impressive paper credentials, but in the wrong fields. Greco was fluent in English, Italian and Spanish; Burns had been a policy analyst focused on family and health care; and Ledeen had co-founded a cooking school. But none had ever worked in the Middle East, none spoke Arabic, and few could tell a balance sheet from an accounts receivable statement.

Other staffers quickly nicknamed the newcomers "The Brat Pack."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A48543-2004May22?language=printer

[underpants]

11. I heard a free lance journalist on Franken's show say the same thing

I was unaware of the WaPo article.

This reporter was sent by Fortune or Forbes to Iraq to report on economic development. The beginning of her story was about trying to find a nice stock shot of a crane in operation in Baghdad but much to her and her photographer's amazement they couldn't find ONE in use. No development at all.

She went on to tell about a 21 year old kid (college drop out truth be told) who posted his resume on the Heritage site and ended up managing the Baghdad police department budget all by himself. This "kid" went to work with US military protection and just outside the Green Zone sat Iraqi accountants, engineers, and other educated experienced IRAQIS unable to find work anywhere. That and the presence of the "Bremer walls"* lead to much resentment by the Iraqis, she said.

*-The "Bremer walls" are 10 foot high slabs of concrete erected around "important" hotels and buildings and clearly tell Iraqis where the US priorities are-if you are on the wrong side of these walls you are way down on the food chain. I think she said they cost $1,000 each (or was it $10K)but COULD be produced by Iraqis for much cheaper and put them to work. The wall segments include the company's name that makes them as well as an international phone number to order more, self included advertising.

[WildClarySage]

4. Kerik was an obviously unsuitable choice.

They are distancing themselves as fast as possible with this bullshit nanny story only because Bush thought he could do any damn thing he wanted and found out to his consternation that there was no way to dress this rat up as a dog. The vehemence with which they have turned on him is evidence of their anger over not getting what they want.

[PurityOfEssence]

5. Ya got that right. They also believe their own propaganda

and think they can get away with everything.

This is most definitely an imperial presidency, but it's also a "because I said so" presidency. They firmly believe that their opinions are immutable fact, even when met with endless evidence to the contrary.

Virtually all of Junior's "appeal" is based on the myth of his great leadership after 9-11, and this means that all the other great "leaders" of that moment are similarly laudable. Kerik is a henchman for the aristocracy and is dirty in all sorts of ways: abandoning a child in Korea, spying on individuals under the guise of "security" when in Saudi Arabia and all sorts of other loose ends.

This mob thinks that they can make pronouncements and they will be respected like the god's-own truth. Mercifully, this makes them incredibly sloppy, but that doesn't mean they won't continue to get away with all sorts of incompetence and dishonesty.

[UTUSN]

7. GONZALEZ Is the Next Train Wreck Waiting to Happen

The Shrubbites have sold themselves to gullible Dittoheads on TWO main points: 1) That only they can make us secure, 2) that 9-11 confers automatic "heroism" (FREE PASS for anything) on anybody connected with it.

KERIK embodied, just as much as Shrub and GUILIANI, both of these pillars and just happened to collapse more obviously because of being unable to get out from underneath his baggage. The two pillars are made of sand.

What was "heroic" about Shrub-GUILIANI-KERIK at 9-11? They just happened to be in power when it happened. If anything, they should have reaped "finger-pointing". KERIK was stepping out of the shower when the planes hit and joined GUILIANI walking up some streets coated in powder. Shrub showed up days later with his cheerleading megaphone atop a pile of bodies, after days when the people were stunned by the absence of leadership. So much for "heroism".

But the Shrubbites have managed to doublespeak 9-11 into permission and adulation for anything, meaning their arrogance in acting like they can do anything they want. Leading to their sloppiness (arrogance) in screwing up the vetting on KERIK, which, by the way, was the poor performance of Alberto GONZALEZ's shop, another screw-up waiting to happen (GONZALEZ, that is).

This brings us back to "security". The Shrubbites can't VET for the same reason they can't manage "security": Because they only hear what they WANT to hear.

[underpants]

9. You are in danger and only W can keep you safe

THAT was the campaign in a nutshell and yes the basis of their power.

The sheeple never took 5 seconds to think about it and ask,"Then why are we in danger?".

[DebJ]

8. of course...because the only check the WH needs is LOYALTY

check. Question: Does he kiss my ass? Answer: Yes. Result: Pick him.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

10. Those tighty whities!!!!

Get me everytime!! LOL!