Since if he's going to select someone to serve as the top environmental lawyer in the Justice Dept., why wouldn't Trump pick someone "who has repeatedly challenged the scientific foundations of U.S. climate policy and was part of a legal team that represented BP in lawsuits stemming from the nation's worst oil spill, the 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster"?
There are times I think he does this stuff just to troll his opponents.
Trump Names BP Oil Spill Lawyer as Top DOJ Environment Attorney
Jeffrey Bossert Clark repeatedly challenged the scientific underpinnings of U.S. climate policy while representing the Chamber of Commerce.
58 view(s)
He's doing it to destroy the government. This has Koch-Norquist-et al written all over it.
I'd say it's more Bannon and his "deconstruction of the administrative state".
????????????
The tl;dr: It's never that simple.
To be fair – any nominee for that position would hopefully be experienced at litigating environmental cases. And their experiences is going to be on the government side, or the corporate side.
Sure – "industry insiders" have their issues – but almost by definition, any person hired for this position has to be an industry insider to be qualified. (And let's face it – BP was in a deep hole, knew they were in a deep hole, so they found the best legal they could. And the guy is good – BP got a sweetheart deal. So the guy certainly knows environmental litigation…..
Also, remember that if the legal tactic taken is to challenge a scientific position, that is what the lawyer will do. A good lawyer doesn't have to believe the point he's defending – he merely needs to defend it well.
Much more problematic would be if he has questionable statements made outside his employ – if he denied global warming as part of his job, that's one thing. If they hired him because he was a lawyer who already had a record of being a denier even off the billing hour clock, that's a lot worse….
+Valdis Klētnieks True. The cases someone takes (or that their firm takes) don't always reflect their personal views. That's certainly true on the criminal justice side of things; it still holds validity in the civil arena (though, in theory, someone with a personal passion for a particular side of an argument would tend to gravitate toward a firm that pursues that same side).
Looking at the article, though, it's clear this guy's a serious climate change denier when he's off the clock. It seems to me that he was chosen at least as much for his personal ideology (not unlike the EPA chief) as his professional competence.
+Roberto Bayardo True enough, many deep & different roots here. But definitely "drowning in bathtub" efforts here.