Navy Yard Shooting

Bipartisan outrage swept through the in the Senate as  Elaine Kaplan, of the Office of Personnel Management, testified that the company that ran the background check on Washington Naval Yard Shooter, Aaron Alexis, did not even attempt to get a copy of his arrest record from the Seattle police, but rather relied on the state record, which is very generic and did not include Alexis’ history of anger management problems.  That would have sent red flags into the air.

Both Republicans and Democrats were shocked by the disclosure.  The Democrats are in a precarious position here, as it is their party who have dropped background checks on illegal aliens,  Navigators in the Obamacare program, and whose president’s administration has warned companies, through the EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) not to run criminal background checks on prospective new employees.  They can feign outrage at the USIS for this oversight, but what happens when we begin seeing crimes committed by those whose backgrounds were intentionally not checked as a matter of policy by their party?

Claire McCaskill, D-Mo, took aim at Kaplan.

take our poll - story continues below

Will You Be Voting In Person November 3rd?

  • Will You Be Voting In Person November 3rd?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to DC Clothesline updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

 “Well, if a police department won’t give us a report, we’ve checked the box.”

“Now, I get it that we can’t go out and do one-on-one on every application for clearance.  But the notion that you’re calling what you’re doing quality control, Ms. Kaplan, is probably, I think, offensive.”

Kaplan replied:

“Yes, we all missed something, to be sure, but we did what was required.  We conducted the investigation that was required by the investigative standards. … Should we be required to get police reports, for example? Should we be required to get mental health information even from someone who has a secret as opposed to a top secret clearance? All these things need to be looked at. But it was not, in our view, a case of malfeasance … We believe the contractor did what they were supposed to do.”

Certainly, if you look at the EEOC directive, they did all that was required of them.  That directive said that you cannot use someone’s previous criminal record against them and if you are required to ignore background checks and hire a sexual deviant to work in your high school, or have a Navigator for Obamacare, with a history of identity theft, why not hire a mentally imbalanced man buying guns and ammo for the federal government?

In the USIS report to the Office of Personnel Management, the incident from three years ago,  was mentioned but instead of being described as Alexis shooting out the tires of the car, the report read, “deflated tires”, which may be technically correct but it’s like saying Bonnie and Clyde died of natural causes, because when you get shot that many times, naturally you die.

The USIS, who vetted Alexis, also vetted Edward Snowden.  I wonder if they also vetted Obama.  The USIS have now replaced their CEO and revised their rules as they apply to background checks.  For the families of the 12 victims gunned down by Aaron Alexis, that will be of little comfort.

Steven Ahle is the Editor of Red Statements.