Frankly, he is just flat out terrible.  You can read his recent document here.  Early on he tells us:

Conservatives must reaffirm that concentrated economic power is just as dangerous as concentrated political power…

I suppose if you hold political power you might think that.  Or try this bit from the conclusion:

But we can make it {antitrust law] more just by ensuring that we do not allow a preoccupation with economic speculation to water down robust enforcement, preferring to err on the side of cautious deconcentration rather than hopeful deference to the interests of concentrated economic powers. Powers, I will note, that apart from their putative lines of business increasingly declare open war on the moral values that undergird the foundation of our constitutional republic.

That last line segues into my next point, namely that perhaps he is hostile to economic analysis ecause it does not judge the morality of the companies under consideration.  (By the way, if the company is truly evil, you might want market power and higher prices!)  On p.32, he calls for explicitly limiting the influence of economists, for instance:

statutorily cabining the use of economic evidence…

You can debate what exactly he might mean by that, but he does not seem intent on raising the status of economists in governmental processes.  Is moving further in that direction really the right way to go these days?  He notes also that:

…antitrust law today has strayed into exactly the kind of “economic extravaganza” that Bork warned against.

Is he referring to Lina Khan?

Nor can he keep up a basic level of professionalism.  Like so many on the current political right, he saves his greatest scorn for libertarians, who arguably are those most likely to see through the power charade.  Here is one example:

Conservatives must reject the lies they have been told by libertarianism…

As a political motive, perhaps projection is sometimes underrated.

The link and pointer are via Larry.