The Untouchable One

robeiae · Oct 6, 2009

First, there's Grove Parc: http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=107693

Then, there's Van Jones: http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=153941

Then, there's the NEA business: http://www.absolutewrite.com/forums/showthread.php?t=155992

Then, there is Obama's Olympic trip.

Now, we have the Dalai Lama (granted, many don't see a problem here): http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/10/05/us/politics/politics-us-usa-obama-dalailama.html

The common thread?

Valerie Jarrett.

She was the head of the company charged with managing Grove Parc.
She was responsible for interviewing and vetting Van Jones for the Green Czar job.
She was Buffy Wicks' boss and may have been behind the NEA stuff.
She was the one that pushed Obama to show up at the IOC meeting.
She was the point man on Tibet.

Not exactly a string of successes on that resume, Valerie...

Question: will Obama cut her loose? He's disassociated himself from others for far less.

Gretad08 · Oct 6, 2009

I wonder why he hasn't yet. What is she bringing to the table?

robeiae · Oct 6, 2009

It may be more of a question of what she's keeping off the table...

But that's speculation, of course.

Don · Oct 6, 2009

It may be that there's just no more room under the bus, rob.

nighttimer · Oct 6, 2009

robeiae said:
But that's speculation, of course.

Is there a specific criminal act or ethical violation you want to point out robeiae, or are you just showing how much time you spend on the right-wing blogosphere?

Why even bring up the Dalai Lama? Both sides agreed there's no reason for a meeting at this time.

Or is simply to throw enough crap at Jarrett with the hope that something--anything--will actually stick?

This entire thread is speculation.

William Haskins · Oct 6, 2009

jarrett is simply obama's version of karl rove, allowing him to publicly stay middle-of-the-road, while providing an avenue for far-left influence in the administration.

dgiharris · Oct 6, 2009

William Haskins said:
jarrett is simply obama's version of karl rove, allowing him to publicly stay middle-of-the-road, while providing an avenue for far-left influence in the administration.

You mean Karl Rove is far-left

How do you do it Blacbird? Chaw? Kaw? No wait, I got it.

caw!!!

William Haskins · Oct 6, 2009

fair enough:

jarrett is simply obama's version of karl rove, allowing him to publicly stay middle-of-the-road, while providing an avenue for far-left influence in the administration in much the same way that rove allowed for far-right influence.

better?

Noah Body · Oct 6, 2009

Don said:
It may be that there's just no more room under the bus, rob.

Ha-ha, I liked this one! Worth the price of admission.

robeiae · Oct 6, 2009

nighttimer said:
Is there a specific criminal act or ethical violation you want to point out robeiae, or are you just showing how much time you spend on the right-wing blogosphere?

No. And where is this "right-wing blogosphere"? I'd like to check it out.

Why even bring up the Dalai Lama? Both sides agreed there's no reason for a meeting at this time.

Both "sides"? I noted that many don't see a problem. However, I think the Free Tibet crowd might disagree: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4090892#

Which side are these peeps on?

Or is simply to throw enough crap at Jarrett with the hope that something--anything--will actually stick?

Nah. Her name keeps popping up in things that didn't make Obama look good. Do you disagree?

This entire thread is speculation.

It's speculation that she was CEO of the company that managed Grove Parc? It's speculation that she was Buffy Wicks' boss? It's speculation that her office was responsible for vetting Jones? As to the Olympics, did you see her comment?

nighttimer · Oct 6, 2009

robeiae said:
No. And where is this "right-wing blogosphere"? I'd like to check it out.

I'm sure you'll be able to find it without my assistance.

Both "sides"? I noted that many don't see a problem. However, I think the Free Tibet crowd might disagree

You can't please everyone and it's a waste of time to try.

Nah. Her name keeps popping up in things that didn't make Obama look good. Do you disagree?

It doesn't matter what I think or you think of Valerie Jarrett. It only matters what the president thinks and when she becomes more of a liability than a asset, I suspect she'll be right where she is today.

It's speculation that she was CEO of the company that managed Grove Parc? It's speculation that she was Buffy Wicks' boss? It's speculation that her office was responsible for vetting Jones? As to the Olympics, did you see her comment?

If there's a crime that's been committed or a ethical lapse that you're aware of, point it out. Otherwise, you're just engaging in conjecture and innuendo.

robeiae · Oct 6, 2009

nighttimer said:
You can't please everyone and it's a waste of time to try.

Okay. But you can't say both sides agree with Obama's decision to not meet with the Dalai Lama as a means of placating China. Clearly, there are some that don't agree.

It doesn't matter what I think or you think of Valerie Jarrett. It only matters what the president thinks and when she becomes more of a liability than a asset, I suspect she'll be right where she is today.

Huh? Did you mean to say that when she becomes more of a liability, she WON'T be where she is today?

If there's a crime that's been committed or a ethical lapse that you're aware of, point it out. Otherwise, you're just engaging in conjecture and innuendo.

Well of course I'm engaging in some speculation. And I'm asking others to do likewise. To whit: will Obama cut her loose?

But her relationship to the things I've noted is not all speculation. What is speculation is the idea that she MAY have been behind the NEA stuff. But note that I say "may." I don't assume, because I don't know. And based on her own words, it seems pretty clear that she was the one pushing Obama towards the Olympic trip. I didn't speculate on Grove Parc or the other stuff, at all. I just noted that she was involved. Because she was.

ColoradoGuy · Oct 6, 2009

Personally, I enjoy very much the right wing blogsphere. It's far more entertaining than the left wing one.

robeiae · Oct 6, 2009

ColoradoGuy said:
Personally, I enjoy very much the right wing blogsphere. It's far more entertaining than the left wing one.

More frothing at the mouth?

LaceWing · Oct 6, 2009

Quoting from Jarrett's wikipedia page:

Jarrett is one of three Senior Advisors to President Obama.[14] She is Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement,[14] managing the White House Office of Public Engagement (formerly the Office of Public Liaison), Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, Office of Urban Affairs, and Chairs the White House Commission on Women and Girls, and White House Office of Olympic, Paralympic, and Youth Sport. [15] Jarrett needed to be granted an "ethics waiver" in order to serve in this position because of her close associations with convicted felon and crooked developer Tony Rezko.[16]

As for the Olympics, having a say there is explicitly in her job description. Whether her advice was right or wrong or conflicted, her influence there would not imo be "undue."

The other functions she's been given, well, it's political speak to me. I can't tell what the job titles mean.

Oh, and also in the wiki article: she was once Michelle Obama's boss.

Is it ultimately Rezko's influence that's being questioned here, in this thread? If so, how about putting the cards out on the table.

robeiae · Oct 6, 2009

LaceWing said:
As for the Olympics, having a say there is explicitly in her job description. Whether her advice was right or wrong or conflicted, her influence there would not imo be "undue."

Did you read the link on this, Lace? This is what she said, in reference to Obama's trip:

"The intelligence that we had from the U.S. Olympic Committee and Chicago bid team was that it was very close and therefore well worth our efforts," said Valerie Jarrett, a senior White House advisor. "The message was that . . . a personal appeal from the president would make a huge difference."

Now, I think that comment was quite a stupid one to make. The "intelligence that we had"? WTF? That's my point, here: she's involved in things that make the admin look bad. So I'm wondering if her time in the admin is coming to an end.

Is it ultimately Rezko's influence that's being questioned here, in this thread? If so, how about putting the cards out on the table.

Nope. If it was, I would have said it was. You're presuming that you can divine things and that I'm somehow not being honest. I don't appreciate it, frankly.

nighttimer · Oct 6, 2009

robeiae said:
Well of course I'm engaging in some speculation. And I'm asking others to do likewise. To whit: will Obama cut her loose?

We could also speculate that the St. Louis Rams and Cleveland Browns will meet in the next Super Bowl. It strikes me as kind of frivolous, but if all you want to do is speculate in the absence of proven facts, have at it.

But her relationship to the things I've noted is not all speculation. What is speculation is the idea that she MAY have been behind the NEA stuff. But note that I say "may." I don't assume, because I don't know. And based on her own words, it seems pretty clear that she was the one pushing Obama towards the Olympic trip. I didn't speculate on Grove Parc or the other stuff, at all. I just noted that she was involved. Because she was.

Sounds like you should be writing your Congressional representatives demanding they conduct hearings into Ms. Jarrett's possibly dubious connections.

Good luck with that.

Gretad08 · Oct 6, 2009

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but Rob, are you suggesting that she isn't doing her job well? I'm not seeing Rob making any implication of dubious behavior, just the implication that so far she hasn't done a good job in her position.

LaceWing · Oct 6, 2009

robeiae said:
You're presuming that you can divine things and that I'm somehow not being honest. I don't appreciate it, frankly.

You're right.

I was trying to link things together as you're seeing it, and also putting "It may be more of a question of what she's keeping off the table...But that's speculation, of course." up there at the front.

Not fair of me to do so. Just asking for clarification would have been better.

Can you lay it out more explicitly so that I'm not tempted to do the same again?

Williebee · Oct 6, 2009

re "Untouchable One"

I'd say that this administration, like pretty much every other one out there, or in the past in this country, will move a person out the door once they decide that person is more harm than good.

Is she currently more harm than good? Or are we just hearing about possible negatives?

As to the Dalai Lama, this quote may be about saving face, but it may also be an indication that things aren't going to stay "same-same" as the past :

"The administration, I think, is aware it is breaking a precedent ... but clearly they have their reasons for that and he (the Dalai Lama) agreed with the decision that was made," said Kate Saunders, a spokeswoman for the Tibetan Buddhist leader.

(Speculation? You bet. Isn't that what we mostly do around here, read the available info and speculate on the meanings and possible future events?)

rugcat · Oct 6, 2009

Gretad08 said:
Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but Rob, are you suggesting that she isn't doing her job well? I'm not seeing Rob making any implication of dubious behavior, just the implication that so far she hasn't done a good job in her position.

It may be more of a question of what she's keeping off the table...

But that's speculation, of course.

I would take Rob's statement as a clear implication that perhaps she knows about some skeletons in the closet, and that might explain why she has kept her position.

Just speculation on my part, of course.

Gretad08 · Oct 6, 2009

rugcat said:
I would take Rob's statement as a clear implication that perhaps she knows about some skeletons in the closet, and that might explain why she has kept her position.

Just speculation on my part, of course.

Ahh, that makes sense too.

LaceWing · Oct 6, 2009

Now that Jarrett has been brought to my attention as a player, and I've read some of the Globe and Atlantic articles (via the first link of the OP) on failed attempts to improve public housing for the poor, I have an inkling of how I might write her as a character in my imaginary WIP, which is partly concerned with real estate developers, who are the bad guys.

For my fictional purposes, I'd put Jarrett in the role of tycoon with a twisted heart, where twisted heart means she might once have had one that pumped real blood, but pursuit of an MBA rerouted things. Her character would be one who was ready to get up and go, but she needs to change her definition of job #1. Government and law and public administration have a different purpose that may not fit the CEO style.

robeiae · Oct 6, 2009

rugcat said:
I would take Rob's statement as a clear implication that perhaps she knows about some skeletons in the closet, and that might explain why she has kept her position.

Just speculation on my part, of course.

Correct, with regard to that statement. It's a half-joking one, though. We can say that about anyone in an appointed role under any admin.

But in general, Williebee and Greta have captured the gist of this: it's an open-ended assessment. I pointed to her being involved--in varying and/or unknown degrees--in some things that don't necessarily make the admin look good. So, the discussion I thought we would be having--for the most part--is about whether or not she'll be shown the door in the near future.

Peeps that can counter the negative associations with positives are free to do so, of course. Don't see any, yet. And I couldn't find any on the "right wing blogosphere"...

Torrance · Oct 6, 2009

I can only hope that Jarrett is jettisoned sooner rather than later.

The Untouchable One

Touch and go

Touch and go

All Living is Local

No Gods No Masters

poet

Disgruntled Scientist

poet

Entertainment Ronin

Touch and go

No Gods No Masters

Touch and go

I've seen worse.

Touch and go

Touch and go

No Gods No Masters

Capeless, wingless, & yet I fly.

Lost in the Fog

Touch and go