Earlier today, Donald Trump nominated Jay Clayton to be the Director of National Intelligence. Clayton, who serves as the interim U.S. Attorney, was chosen only after he publicly voiced skepticism about the integrity of vote counting in California. This is the clearest sign yet of the dangers facing free and fair elections in November.

In many respects, Clayton is an odd choice for Trump's next Director of National Intelligence. He spent most of his career at a prestigious New York law firm, far removed from the worlds of intelligence or national security.

In 2017, Trump selected him to head the Securities and Exchange Commission. That appointment made sense. His firm, Sullivan & Cromwell, has deep ties to Wall Street, and Clayton seemed a typical Republican appointee to the agency that oversees the stock markets.

When Trump was reelected in 2024, Clayton was nominated to be the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. This was a less obvious choice. Clayton had none of the criminal law experience that candidates typically have. Controversy was also swirling around how Trump intended to interfere with the work of federal prosecutors, including in that office.

Judged against Trump's other appointees, Clayton kept a relatively low profile. While there were obvious signs of politicization within his office, they ranked lower than what was happening elsewhere.

That changed earlier this week.

Sitting on the set of CNBC, Clayton suddenly offered opinions about voting rights, election integrity, and the vote-counting process in California. He declared that he doesn't "hear anybody claiming that they don't have access to the ballot box," but on election integrity, "we're doing an absolutely terrible job, and the American people are right to question it."

When asked directly whether he was claiming there is evidence of wrongdoing in California, he said, without evidence, that California's vote-counting system creates an "opportunity for fraud."

At first, I did not know what to make of this new focus by Manhattan's top federal prosecutor on the "opportunity for fraud" in California voting. I could not understand why a securities lawyer would suddenly have strong opinions about voting access and how ballots are counted. Nothing in Clayton's background or record suggested any prior interest in election administration or voting rights.

Now, with the announcement of Clayton as the new Director of National Intelligence, it all makes sense. Trump might have been satisfied that the top federal prosecutor in New York had no history of embracing election denialism — but he certainly was not going to accept that from his Director of National Intelligence.

The previous DNI, Tulsi Gabbard, was a proud election denier and promoter of voting conspiracy theories who had even attended the seizure of ballots in Fulton County. The first person named as her successor, Bill Pulte, is described by some as "Little Trump" and is widely viewed as an extreme partisan willing to do whatever Trump wants.

If Clayton wanted the job, it seems clear that he had to demonstrate loyalty on the one issue Trump cares about most: lying about voting and elections. What better way to do that, in the Trump era, than live on cable television? In retrospect, the CNBC appearance was his public audition for a new role he apparently coveted.

In the coming days, voices in the legacy media and the Washington establishment will tell us that Jay Clayton is a serious person — that he is an improvement over Gabbard and far better than Pulte. They will tell us that he is the best we can expect and that if he is rejected, the next person may be worse.

We must not allow that to become the standard. An impressive resume cannot substitute for decency and character. We cannot sacrifice free and fair elections out of fear of something worse.

Clayton may have a more impressive pedigree, a more polished appearance, and an air of reasonableness. But that is not the test for who should be trusted with our country's national intelligence. Nor should it be an excuse for misleading the American people.

Jay Clayton has shown that he is willing to spread baseless lies about voting in order to curry favor with Trump. Whether he is a committed election denier or merely an opportunist is not for me to judge — and, in any case, it is beside the point.

What matters is that Clayton is just the latest example of someone willing to sacrifice their dignity and reputation to serve Donald Trump. What matters is that he is prepared to undermine free and fair elections.

Those of us in the pro-democracy movement must call Clayton out for what he is and the threat he poses. We cannot allow the bar to be lowered or grade Trump's nominees on a curve.

Jay Clayton has no business serving as Director of National Intelligence, and his nomination should be rejected.