Alright. I Give Up on the Vetting Process.
Vivek Kundra, Obama's currently-suspended-chief-information-officer, got busted on a petty theft charge in 1997. I don't think one misstep should ruin anyone's career, particularly not if that indiscretion comes at a fairly young age. But, as Valleywag writes:
There are two equally disturbing possibilities here: Either the army of White House lawyers vetting candidates just didn't bother to check Kundra's criminal records. Or they agreed that Kundra's probation-before-judgment maneuver meant the crime he admitted committing in court was nothing to worry about.
I wrote yesterday that I thought a combination of naivete and arrogance were responsible for the failures of the Obama vetting process. But I honestly don't have an explanation for Kundra, and the way revelations about him have continued to leak out. At minimum, the vetting seems poorly done. And the public relations handling of this is an embarrassment to public relations people everywhere. It doesn't matter if Kundra gets to keep his job or not at this point. He's already created a huge mess.
COMMENTS
Post a Comment
By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although GovExec does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Government Executive Editor in Chief Tom Shoop, along with other editors and staff correspondents, take a fresh look at news affecting the management and operations of the federal bureaucracy.
How can anyone even think that the WH didn't do a simple background check when vetting this candidate?
The real issue is why is he on leave when the FBI has said that he is not involved in the investigation?
It seems the WH is vetting talented individuals, pulling them into their administration despite what they've learned, and then not even offering their support.
I feel bad for these guys. Kundra and all others in upper level appointments should just stage a walk-out.
Anon. Posted Tuesday, March 17, 2009 12:01 PMI really don't understand why the "petty theft charge" is an issue. He was obviously young and impressionable when it occurred and he's accomplished so much since then. Maybe he made a mistake and learned his lesson. And why does it reflect poorly on the vetting process? I would assume the White House knew and chose to proceed with his appointment anyway because he's qualified for the job - and isn't that what should matter? Also, if memory serves correctly, wasn't our last president convicted of a DUI?
Vetted Just Fine Posted Tuesday, March 17, 2009 12:02 PMI really don't understand why the "petty theft charge" is an issue. He was obviously young and impressionable when it occurred and he's accomplished so much since then. Maybe he made a mistake and learned his lesson. And why does it reflect poorly on the vetting process? I would assume the White House knew and chose to proceed with his appointment anyway because he's qualified for the job - and isn't that what should matter? Also, if memory serves correctly, wasn't our last president convicted of a DUI?
Anon Posted Tuesday, March 17, 2009 12:03 PMI really don't understand why the "petty theft charge" is an issue. He was obviously young and impressionable when it occurred and he's accomplished so much since then. Maybe he made a mistake and learned his lesson. And why does it reflect poorly on the vetting process? I would assume the White House knew and chose to proceed with his appointment anyway because he's qualified for the job - and isn't that what should matter? Also, if memory serves correctly, wasn't our last president convicted of a DUI?
DC Resident Posted Tuesday, March 17, 2009 12:04 PMWhy don't these guys just speak to the press about what's REALLY happening at the White House?
First they get vetted, then they get dragged through the mud by the media, and no one in the administration has anything to say about it.
What is the real story? Why no official statements. The FBI saying that Kundra is NOT a target isn't enough. If he's not a target, why is he on leave?
White House needs to speak up and either defend their picks or admit to complacency in media destroying them.
Confused Posted Tuesday, March 17, 2009 12:21 PMWhat an amazing co-incidence, that two absolutely identical posts arrive, from two different authors, just one minute apart !!!
The Talking Points Trolls are on the job!
BUSTED Posted Tuesday, March 17, 2009 12:25 PMLet's not convict people before knowing the facts. I know folks who have been charged with assault by a family member because the legal definition in the state allowed it. For example if you're in Virginia and someone touches you without your permission, that's simple assault.
I agree with Anon - the sad part is that the White House isn't standing behind folks.
Know the Facts Posted Tuesday, March 17, 2009 12:33 PMI'm starting to wonder now. This theft conviction was in 1996/1997. This guy is 35 now which places him as 23 or 24 years old then. That's old enough to know that theft is crime. Was this guy destitute back then? Did he need to poach a peanut butter and jelly sandwich because he was starving? Doubt it. Wonder if he got into other trouble that hasn't been brought to light. I know in many govt agencies around here if you get caught by your own people (not an IG investigation) doing something wrong, they will let the person resign and take no further action thus allowing him to claim a clean work history and even receive unblemished recommendations. Has anyone actually interviewed former employers and coworkers? Is this White House asleep at the switch like the last one?
DelMarVa IT Worker Posted Tuesday, March 17, 2009 12:52 PMI can't believe how white house will let their employees get trashed like this. If there were issues, should have been dealt during vetting process. If he is not the target of the investigation they should show some support towards him. Putting him on leave of absence was big mistake. Kundra has clearly established a lot as far. What about George W Bush convicted of DUI and was presdient for 2 terms
GovExec Reader Posted Tuesday, March 17, 2009 2:38 PMSO much for change. What's sad about this is that this may splash on Kundra and that's why he's on leave. He was in charge of the DC office and one of his former chief lieutenants is in hot water. Contracts had to be approved be approved by Kundra right? Do any of us honestly believe that he's not involved in this?
Whoever is putting candidates in front of the White House for these positions should be fired.
Will Posted Tuesday, March 17, 2009 3:46 PM