By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Charles Kushner, father of Jared Kushner, was confirmed as U.S. Ambassador to France by a narrow Senate vote. His 2005 conviction for campaign finance violations, tax evasion, and witness tampering, including a plot involving a sex worker, resulted in a two-year prison sentence and a presidential pardon in 2020. Despite this history, Kushner secured the position with the support of a single Democratic Senator, arguing his past mistakes improved his judgment. His confirmation has been met with mixed reactions, with some questioning his qualifications and predicting potential strained diplomatic relations.
Read the original article here
Charles Kushner, father of Jared Kushner and a real estate developer with a lengthy criminal record, has been confirmed as the new US Ambassador to France. This appointment is raising significant eyebrows given Kushner’s past convictions.
His 2005 guilty plea included charges of illegal campaign contributions, tax evasion, and the particularly egregious offense of witness tampering. The details of the witness tampering charge are especially unsettling; he orchestrated a scheme to use a prostitute to compromise his brother-in-law’s marriage, all in retaliation for the brother-in-law cooperating with federal investigators. This act, described by former US Attorney Chris Christie as one of the “most loathsome, disgusting crimes” he had ever prosecuted, showcases a disturbing disregard for ethical conduct and the rule of law.
The appointment itself is a stark reminder of the Trump administration’s pattern of appointing individuals with questionable backgrounds to high-profile positions. Kushner’s pardon by President Trump further emphasizes this trend, seemingly prioritizing loyalty and political connections over qualifications and integrity. This choice also raises questions about the vetting process for such significant diplomatic roles.
The reaction to Kushner’s appointment has been swift and largely negative. Many are questioning whether France will even accept him as their ambassador. The very nature of his past crimes, particularly the witness tampering incident, seems directly at odds with the expected conduct of a diplomat. International relations often hinge on trust and cooperation; Kushner’s history casts serious doubt on his suitability to represent the United States in such a delicate capacity.
The fact that a convicted felon, who engaged in such morally reprehensible actions, is now slated to represent the United States to a key ally, is viewed by many as a profound embarrassment. It tarnishes the image of American diplomacy and raises legitimate concerns about the standards and values that the current administration holds.
Further fueling the controversy is the political backdrop of this appointment. Many believe it highlights the lack of accountability for powerful individuals and further exposes the deep-seated political divisions within the United States. The appointment is seen by many as a blatant disregard for traditional norms and expectations of diplomatic representation.
The appointment underscores a broader concern about the erosion of ethical standards in American politics. It has reignited discussions about the importance of holding individuals accountable for their actions, regardless of their social standing or political connections. The sheer audacity of appointing someone with Kushner’s history underscores a prevailing sentiment that the norms of decorum and accountability in the US are being increasingly disregarded.
The focus is now shifting to France’s response. The French government has the prerogative to refuse agrément, essentially blocking Kushner’s official appointment. Their decision will carry significant weight and will serve as an important indicator of their stance on this controversial appointment, as well as a clear reflection of their evaluation of US-France relations under this new appointment.
The controversy surrounding Charles Kushner’s appointment extends far beyond the immediate implications of a single diplomatic role. It represents a larger cultural discussion of power, accountability, and ethical standards in both domestic and international affairs. The situation is a clear test of the French government’s commitment to those same standards, and their response will likely have considerable implications for the larger relationship between France and the United States.