Column on Heller and the conflict within DoJ
In the Washington Post.
In trying to understand bureaucratic infighting, you must grasp: (1) political appointees are a tiny, tiny oil film atop the ocean of career people. Esp. at Justice. (2) They often have no experience at all, and are dependent upon what their subordinates tell them. In this case, Clement certainly has lots of experience generally, but probably knew very little of the Second Amendment. If you don't know the field, and don't really have the time (weeks or months) to get up to speed on it, and all your subordinates are telling you this is the only way to go, odds are you'll go that way.
UPDATE: a commenter points out a section of the article that I missed on quick read. It rather leads me to doubt the author's reliability. I've talked to plenty of people in connection with this case, and mooted Gura, and nobody doubts his capability. Frankly, we grilled the heck out of him, time after time, for about five hours, and he handled it quite well. This is the first I've heard of anything relating to Ted Olson. And in any event, it's Alan's and Bob's and Clark's case, so no other gun rights advocate would have a say in it.
I wonder if the author didn't hear a distorted version of the fact that Alan offered to share his time with Ted Cruz, Solicitor General of Texas?