In his May 4 letter to Olson, Leahy didn't mince words: "The credibility of the person appointed to be the Solicitor General is of paramount importance.

"When arguing in front of the Supreme Court on behalf of the United States Government," Leahy writes, "the Solicitor General is expected to come forward with both the strengths and the weaknesses of the case, to inform the Court of things it might not otherwise know, and to be honest in all his or her dealings with the Court. I expect that same responsiveness and cooperation from nominees before this Committee."

Olson has certainly given the committee plenty of reasons to wonder whether he's up to the task.

Of paramount concern to the Judiciary Committee now appears to be what Leahy regards as Olson's "lack of responsiveness" to questions about Olson's role in an investigation into the Arkansas-era lives of Bill and Hillary Clinton, the so-called "Arkansas Project." Another trails back to the mid-1980s, when an independent counsel was appointed to investigate whether Olson misled Congress.

And there's a third reason, which can be found in Olson's most recent sojourn as then-candidate George W. Bush's lead federal attorney during the Florida recount mess.

Because while Olson has made a name for himself as a successful attorney and a beloved member of the Washington right, it's certainly an open question whether he's capable of the integrity needed for a job first held by Kentucky's Benjamin Bristow, who made a name for himself in the 1800s by aggressively prosecuting members of the Ku Klux Klan.

This is not escaping the notice of the Senate Judiciary Committee, a senior Democratic Senate aide says. "This seems to be a pattern with this guy," the aide said.

Salon News A Salon-eye view of the day's news, with investigative reports, analysis and interviews with newsmakers.