Jay Clayton, appointed by Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate Democrats linked to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, is facing scrutiny for what many see as a politically motivated task, according to The New Republic’s Michael Tomasky. Clayton, a corporate lawyer with no prosecutorial experience, is accused of being chosen for a role that has little to do with justice and everything to do with political maneuvering.
Clayton, who previously chaired the Securities and Exchange Commission during President Donald Trump’s first term, was appointed to investigate individuals like former President Bill Clinton, presidential adviser Larry Summers, and Democratic donor Reid Hoffman. Tomasky, however, argues that Clayton’s background in high finance makes him ill-suited for the job.
Read Also: Loyal Trump Voters Turn Angry as He Dismisses Ranchers Protesting Argentina Beef Imports
“One thing that impressed me, and that was at odds with the standard Trumpian flouting of rules of any kind governing the behavior of appointees and their families, is that his wife, a Goldman Sachs official, resigned her position when he took the job,” Tomasky notes. “What? People in the Trump solar system acting ethically of their own volition? Hard to imagine how Trump tolerated that.”
Despite these positive observations about Clayton’s personal ethics, Tomasky points out a glaring issue: Clayton has no prosecutorial experience. This raises doubts about his ability to oversee an investigation of this magnitude. When Clayton was nominated to run the Southern District of New York earlier this year, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer blocked his nomination.
However, Trump appointed him on an interim basis for 120 days, after which the federal court would decide whether to confirm him. Though Clayton has remained relatively silent in his role, critics have pointed out that he did not speak out when Bondi fired Maurene Comey, the daughter of James Comey, who had overseen the prosecutions of Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell.
Read Also: Farmers Outraged as Trump Prioritizes Argentina Over U.S. Ranchers with Beef Import Plan
Tomasky reflects on how the situation could unfold: “The Aaron Sorkin-movie version of Clayton would have told Bondi to stuff it Saturday and resigned—I do not hold this public trust to go on politically motivated fishing expeditions. But that’s not real life, especially in Trumpworld.”
Tomasky concludes by noting the two possibilities for why Clayton might bring charges against his targets. “One might be that there’s actually evidence sufficient for an indictment. In which case, let justice be done. But in Donald Trump’s and Pam Bondi’s America, we would be quite justified in suspecting a second explanation: That Clayton did what he was ordered by the White House to do.”
As the investigation progresses, Tomasky says, “I’m guessing that in six months’ time, we’ll know a lot more about Jay Clayton than we know today.”