by James Oliphant
Who is Paul Clement, other than the man who has just inherited--temporarily at least--an agency in shambles and under a congressional microscope?
One thing is for certain: the new acting attorney general isn't where he is by accident. Clement, 41, has been solicitor general of the United States since March 2005, heading the office that argues on behalf of the government before the Supreme Court. He's also a conservative wunderkind, the kind of lawyer who could wind up on the high court himself someday.
With degrees from Georgetown, Harvard, and Cambridge, he served as a legal clerk for D.C. appeals court judge Laurence Silberman, a godfather of sorts to Republican lawyers, and later to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Clement joined Chicago-based Kirkland & Ellis in 1994, just as one of the firm's luminaries, Kenneth Starr, was leaving to head up the Whitewater investigation as independent counsel.
He then moved on to the Hill, serving on the staff of then-Sen. John Ashcroft (R-Mo.). When Ashcroft was named attorney general in 2001, Clement signed on as a senior deputy in the solicitor general's office, despite the fact that he had never argued a case before the Supreme Court. Clement assumed the top solicitor's post in 2005, after the departure of Theodore Olson (who has been mentioned as a possible candidate for the permanent AG spot).
Clement has spent much of his government career defending the Bush administration's aggressive stand in terrorism cases, from the indefinite detention of enemy combatants to the lack of full due process rights for Guantanamo detainees. More recently this summer it fell upon Clement to oversee an internal investigation at the Department of Justice as to whether Alberto Gonzales perjured himself in congressional testimony relating to the U.S. attorney scandal. All of the senior department officials above him had either already resigned or been implicated in the scandal.
In a conference call with reporters Monday, Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), the ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, expressed confidence in Clement's ability to run the department on an interim basis, saying he has "the confidence of the public." Specter, however, expressed hope that the administration would soon name a permanent replacement for Gonzales, who, unlike Clement, would have to face a Senate confirmation hearing.







Comments
Sorry, if the nominee has spent 10 seconds as part of this 'regime', then he, she or it is disqualified as a matter of law.
Simply put, to be a member of this administration, the ONLY qualification you needed was blind loyalty to Bush/Cheney. No other criteria need apply. This meant that all other duties and obligations were subordinated to the needs of Bush/Cheney. This is a law enforcement job, not a crony protection racket.
I'll even (reluctantly) accept a bright conservative appointee AS LONG AS THEY ARE NOT CONNECTED TO THIS MISADMINISTRATION. Clement gets an "F".
Posted by: weinerdog43 | August 27, 2007 1:32 PM
wienerdog43,
Amen, brutha.
Posted by: Doug Zook | August 27, 2007 1:39 PM
weinerdog43, good post, well spoken.
Posted by: John E | August 27, 2007 1:46 PM
Looks great to me. Anyone that the Left despises seems like he/she is MORE than qualified to be a great attorney general.
Posted by: John D | August 27, 2007 1:59 PM
The devil has a fine haircut!
Posted by: john | August 27, 2007 2:03 PM
"NICE TO MEET YOU MR. CLEMENT, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES IS?"
WE HAVE TO ASK AND ASK SOON, BEFORE BUSH GETS IN HIS OWN INTERPRETATION OF THAT ARTICLES OF THE CONSTITUTION LIKE THE 4TH ADMENDMENT.
DID THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION COMMIT A CRIME AGAINST THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES? THAT'S A YES AND NO QUESTION.
YES,
WHAT, YES SENATOR THEY DID!
IMPEACH, CENSOR, IMPEACH JUST DO SOMETHING BUT DO IT ACCORDING TO THE LAW.
NOT A PROBLEM SIR!
Posted by: Roger Morris | August 27, 2007 2:09 PM
I don't know much about Mr. Clement, beyond what I just read above. But re: the response to him: I thought that connections to corruption were not enough to besmirch character. That attitude has been well documented in previous discussions re: the connection of Illinois' junior senator to the corrupt power brokers of Illinois politics. When and how can we judge that a person has been corrupted by the company they keep?
Posted by: JB | August 27, 2007 2:58 PM
Little Johnny, this is the difference between you 26%ers and the rest of us: we'll accept some scummy conservative as long as he or she is not affiliated with the Bush administration. You guys will never admit or accept anyone who has not been pre approved by Rush, Coulter, Kraphammer, et al...
Posted by: weinerdog43 | August 27, 2007 8:27 PM
Weinerbrain, I will park my car with Bush, Cheney, Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, Krauthammer any day of the week and not with you and your ilk, the Loony Left.
Posted by: John D | August 27, 2007 9:54 PM
Like they would allow you to park your car anywhere near them, Johnny Headchopper. That is, if you actually owned a car in the 1st place. Pretty sure the security for each of these people would kick a nut job like you to the curb in a heartbeat.
Posted by: Anonymous | August 27, 2007 11:30 PM