Did EPA chief Jackson resign in protest over the Keystone pipeline?

The eventual completion of the full-length Keystone XL pipeline seems more and more like an inevitability for the Obama administration, as it continues to clear bureaucratic hurdles and TransCanada proposes new routes to work with and not against the greenie-grain — not to mention the clamorous pressure to finally allow all of the undeniable economic benefits doing so would bring about already.

As environmentally innocuous as the pipeline actually is, the eco-radicals decided a long time ago that they’d remain dead set against the whole idea on principle, and they’ve managed to turn it into one of the most contentious energy-related issues of the moment (nevermind that terrestrial pipelines are the safest and most efficient way of transporting the oil sands, and the oil is going to extracted whether we do it or China does). The official line is that the State Department’s review is still ongoing, but the dawning realization that this thing is probably happening was apparently not met amicably by a certain high-level Obama official, reports the NY Post (h/t RedState):

EPA chief Lisa Jackson suddenly resigned last week because she was convinced that President Obama is planning to green-light the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline, The Post has learned.

“She was going to stay on until November or December,” said a Jackson insider. “But this changed it. She will not be the EPA head when Obama supports it [Keystone] getting built.” …

And Jackson has told insiders that the president will approve the project this time — perhaps as soon as March or April.

Jackson’s spokeswoman, Victoria Rivas-Vazquez, referred back to the original announcement that she wanted to “pursue new challenges, time with her family and new opportunities.”

Let us not forget Jackson’s highly dubious use of an extracurricular e-mail account, and maybe it was just one of several factors, but this looks like a possible sign that the head of the unabashedly zealous independent agency was not at all pleased with the vague direction in which President Obama is planning to take his energy policy in the second term, which could be… at least not bad news? Maybe? Fingers crossed?