The problem is: vetted by whom?
Remember Gary Aldrich's book Unlimited Access in which he describes the Clintons' systematically dismantling the security system in the WH. FBI agents who actually tried to preserve security were booted. (The Rats seized on the story of Clinton sneaking out of the WH to various hotels to visit various bimbos to discredit the whole book and the national security threat was completely ignored.)
Remember good ole Louis Freeh focusing exclusively on white, Christian, constitution supporting males as the only terrorist threat. Remember the many atrocities that led to and which could never have been committed without complicit, compromised agents of the FBI.
Remember that Muslim FBI agent who refused to wear a wire while speaking to a fellow Muslim. "Muslims don't record other Muslims." (Pre 911.)
So who vetted these guys (or anybody else for that matter)? Was it one of the many honest and diligent FBI or SS agents, or was it one of the Clintonian models or worse?
My point is NOT that there cannot be such thoroughly vetted people who would be safe to be in the WH. I just think the job has to be done again and by people with no obvious compromising characteristics such as Clintonian contamination and/or a religious bias one way or the other.
Well Sal, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. My opinion is that the Bush/Cheney White House is run by competent men and women who look askance at prophylactics on the Christmas Tree.
It is inconceivable to me that people of their caliber have not already revetted post 9/11/01.