![I am one of you [940x545 - 61KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/hp5Ei7.jpg){kind=link}
Oh, McConnell was responsible for, say, Kushner?
Indeed.
Oh, McConnell was responsible for, say, Kushner?
Indeed.
McConnell allowed Kushner to be granted security clearance and to enter the "inner sanctum" of the executive branch, so yes.
McConnell allowed Kushner to be granted security clearance and to enter the "inner sanctum" of the executive branch, so yes.
How? The senate didn't approve Kushner; he was never an official cabinet member. The president is the ultimate classification authority, not the senate majority leader.
I still fail to see what McConnell had to do with it. Maybe you have a better example?
How? The senate didn't approve Kushner; he was never an official cabinet member. The president is the ultimate classification authority, not the senate majority leader.
I still fail to see what McConnell had to do with it. Maybe you have a better example?
The Constitutional provision applies to all positions, not just the Cabinet.
In this instance, McConnell consented by not objecting. Imagine what would have happened if, say, Mike Lindell had been granted the same special status conferred to Kushner. McConnell would have clearly objected to that.
The Constitutional provision applies to all positions, not just the Cabinet.
In this instance, McConnell consented by not objecting. Imagine what would have happened if, say, Mike Lindell had been granted the same special status conferred to Kushner. McConnell would have clearly objected to that.
(post is archived)