I think you're stretching to find a contradiction where none exists.
Read the passage you quoted carefully, especially this sentence: "
During the primaries, Craig was an early Clinton alumni defector to Obama." It says Clinton
alumni, not Clinton
campaign.
In other words, this is someone who had worked with the Clintons previously and who some people might have guessed would back Hillary Clinton in the primaries but who instead chose to support Barack Obama.
I don't see any significant act of disloyalty in that. If he had signed on with the Clinton campaign in the primaries and then switched sides, that would be a different story. But the article you cited does not indicate anything like that.
What the article indicates is that the person is loyal to people for whom he is working. That's a desirable quality. When he worked for the Clinton's, he was loyal to them.
He was no longer working for them at the time the primaries began. He made a choice that Obama was the candidate he preferred and campaigned for him. There's no betrayal involved in that, unless there is some reason to think that Craig had indicated he was going to support Hillary in the primaries.
And there's no reason for Obama to think that Craig won't give the same loyalty to him, while Craig is working in his administration, that Craig gave to the Clinton's while he was working in theirs.
Greg Craig was selected as White House Council. Strange name.
I agree, "White House
Council" is a strange name for the job Craig was appointed to. It's usually referred to as "White House
Counsel".
