views
Washington: President Donald Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, does not have a high-enough security clearance level to gain access to some of the most sensitive U.S. government secrets, the Washington Post reported on Thursday, citing two people familiar with his access.
Kushner, who was named by Trump as a senior adviser on a wide range of issues, was granted a permanent security clearance in late May, but only at the "top secret" level, a status that does not provide access to closely guarded intelligence, the Post said, citing the two sources.
Limits on Kushner's access to the intelligence could be an impediment to his ability to manage his portfolio for the president, including developing a Middle East peace plan and meeting with foreign officials.
Kushner had wide access to highly classified intelligence for the first year of the Trump administration, even though he only held an interim security clearance as he waited completion of his background investigation, the Post said.
Kushner has not been approved to see "sensitive compartmented information," access to which is determined by the CIA, the newspaper reported.
That has blocked him from seeing some parts of the President's Daily Brief, a highly classified summary of world events that sometimes describes intelligence programs and operations, the Post said, citing the two sources.
Asked about the Post story, White House spokeswoman Lindsay Walters told Reuters the White House did not comment on security clearances.
Kushner attorney Abbe Lowell did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Post said Lowell declined to confirm Kushner's clearance level but said it was adequate for him to perform his job.
The reasons for the curbs on Kushner's access to intelligence were not immediately clear, including whether there was any relation to the ongoing investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller into alleged Russian tampering with the 2016 U.S. election, the Post said. Investigators have looked at Kushner's interactions with foreign officials.
Comments
0 comment