The American People put their trust in the chief executive they elect. The last three (Obama, Clinton and GW Bush) could never have held a security clearance because of drug use and in Obama's case there are other issues - such as citizenship questions, hidden/sealed records and Marxist affiliation that would have been disqualifying.
In the case of elected officials, the will of the people over-rides the bureaucratic process that people would have otherwise have to wade through. I'm not necessarily opposed to this. The will of the people is what the democratic process is all about.
On issues of healthcare, of the wisdom of taking over AIG Insurance, General Motors, Citi Group and other massive firms, the sublimation of the banking industry and a myriad of other daunting problems the president does have authority to act on - we have to trust him.
Has he proven himself trustworthy? Has he told the truth to the American people or does he only tell "convenient truth" when it suits his purposes to do so?
Can we keep our Republic if our president is inherently untrustworthy?