Quote Originally Posted by Quaoarsking View Post
Every single time someone says this, people have to be reminded that it wasn't until Lebby got to his 4th job that he put Briles onto the sideline. That's something that didn't come up in any of his 4 vettings, but will come up in his 5th. It's a bit of a red flag that maybe Lebby doesn't think that Briles really did anything all that bad.

Again, I'm willing to give Lebby a chance as long as it's crystal clear (as in fireable offense) that he doesn't pull that shit again. But the "he passed vetting 4 times so he automatically should a 5th time" argument just doesn't work when there's new information since the 4th vetting.
There is no new information. If Art Briles was found not negligent, who the hell are we to say he was guilty of that?