Here is a question a number of readers have asked; and it's a good one.
Given his role in the Homeland Security chain of command, Michael Brown must have had a reasonably high security clearance for his job. But to get even the most basic security clearance requires a very extensive background check, in which FBI investigators go back through your resume, talk to past employers, look up old addresses, etc.
Yet, at least Brown's public resume appears to contain a number of innaccuracies of a substantial nature. What's more, at least two of his former employers appear to have given him very poor marks. (I base this on the assumption that the horse folks who fired him probably didn't have a lot good to say and the comments from another former employer, Stephen Jones, here
There's some similar sort of background check when you get your senate confirmation. So, did all these fibs come out in that background check? And if so, why didn't they raise any red flags, let alone scuttle his nomination?
: When I say 'resume' above, I don't mean the FBI works literally from a resume. But they get all your background info from you, including former places of residence, employment, etc.)