3 ms·
It had to be the appointee. The analysis was squashed at a low level by a procedural technicality, and the issue was too significant for the agency head to be u
by nunuvit 3y ago
It had to be the appointee. The analysis was squashed at a low level by a procedural technicality, and the issue was too significant for the agency head to be uninvolved. On paper though, everyone's hands are clean.