Can't wait!
Posted on 07/01/2007 9:13:44 PM PDT by Politicalmom
WASHINGTON, June 29 — On Christmas Eve 1994, Fred D. Thompson Jr. was out of a job. A 34-year-old self-described late bloomer, Mr. Thompson had graduated from law school just two years before and practiced law only for his father, Fred D. Thompson Sr., who was about to be sworn in as a senator from Tennessee.
“I was out on the street, knocking on doors,” recalled the younger Mr. Thompson, who is known as Tony.
But attending Brentwood Methodist Church in Nashville that night, Tony Thompson ran into the departing incumbent senator, Harlan Mathews, a Democrat. Mr. Mathews invited Tony to join him in a Nashville lobbying business, a job that would let him capitalize on his father’s new position.
“I don’t just believe in the tooth fairy,” Mr. Mathews said. “A lot of people were seeking access — not necessarily unfair access, but seeking access — so Tony was employed in a number of areas where his father had made a reputation or his father’s advice or whatever was going to be valuable one of these days.”
Now the elder Mr. Thompson, who also worked as a lobbyist before and after his eight years in the Senate, is aiming for an even higher post, preparing a run for the Republican presidential nomination. In the folksy drawl that built him a lucrative sideline as a screen actor, Mr. Thompson is presenting himself as a reform-minded outsider taking on Washington, just as he did when he campaigned for the Senate as “Ol’ Fred” the “real live country lawyer,” and cruised Tennessee in a rented red pickup truck.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
i suppose chelsea received her six figure job out of school
due to all her fabulous work experience.
THIS COMMENT BROUGHT TO YOU BY WIFE O’BUCKHEAD
The Presidency makes them all rich... except poor ol’ U.S. Grant.
What did Daniel do for 170k of donor's money?
IIRC, he was the PAC's lawyer, so that's the legal fees for all of the filing paperwork, etc., that's required just to have the PAC open.
It looks like the Times messed with the dates, so they could say what they did in the last paragraph.
The actual facts on this came out months ago.
Mr. Thompson, of Tennessee, announced that he would not seek re-election to the Senate in 2002. But since then, his political action committee has paid $244,000 in “management/consulting fees” to his son’s consulting firm in Nashville, according to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission.
During the same period, the Fred D. Thompson PAC donated a total of $225,000 to Republican candidates and party organizations, according to the reports.
By contrast:
Mrs. Clinton’s HILLPAC has paid about $2 million in salaries since 2002, while contributing $2 million to Democratic candidates for office. Mr. Edwards’s PAC paid about $1 million in salaries while contributing $200,000 to Democrats when he used it during the 2002 and 2004 elections. Mr. Edwards primarily used his PAC to fund his political career, rather than to contribute to Democratic candidates. Mr. Obama, who only had a PAC for the 2006 election, paid about $500,000 in salaries and donated $770,000 to Democrats.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB117712310290177718.html?mod=home_whats_news_us
Fred’s son was paid less than $50,000 per year to manage the PAC. His father’s PAC is not the only one managed by his firm. There is a great deal of legal expertise involved in running such a PAC, even if it doesn’t do much. From the prices I’ve heard thrown around about what it costs to run these things, it sounds like Fred got his son’s services cheaply.
There’s even a FR thread on this article from back then:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1821336/posts?q=1&;page=1
You mean he was paid 50K a year for writing a few checks. The Senator had left office. Come on. This is nepotism at the very least. One $ for my son and one for the Republicans. Remember, this money was given by many small investors to help the Senator get elected. They surely did not intend the money to go to his son.
The donor's who provided this money did not intend to subsidize nepotism.
No, PACs need to be managed and they need someone qualified to do it. I don’t expect someone like you to look at this at all objectively, but this will blow up in the face of anyone who tries to exploit it.
What’s the matter? Your attacks over Fred’s lymphoma weren’t gaining enough traction, so you had to move to this? This won’t work any better, but thanks for playing.
The legal fees paid by the fact are also not unusual, and in fact are pretty small given the reporting and filing rules, probably because it wasn't very active. As posted in #25, the firm that Thompson's son worked for has experience with this type of work. It would be a different story, but still no scandal, if Thompson hired his son to do the job if his son's firm didn't already do that type of work.
Anyone who thinks this is a reason to think any less of Thompson is grasping at straws.
I bear Fred Thompson no animosity but his seeming claim to fame on FR and elsewhere is he is "pro-life." His senate career was not a distinguished one. He has no executive experience. These latter two characteristics mean we are going to count on his character. This means we are going to examine his previous conduct in office.
I repeat, this was a simple case of nepotism as one can find. Writing two or three checks could have closed out this PAC. Actually, these PACS should be abolished when a person leaves office and the money either returned or sent in toto to the a political party or a designated candidate.
I am reading this looking for Fred’s “deal killer” and thinking “this is it? THIS is their hit piece?”
I’m calling BFD on this one, pardon my French.
Fred himself has never said as such. He’s suggested he’s different than the pack, which is true.
He’s actually an inside-outsider. What that means is yeah, he’s been inside the beltway and is well connected. But, he’s never been “of” Washington in the sense that he’s always been a bit disgusted by the way things are done there.
Don't pretend you can speak for me or any other Thompson supporter. If Hunter hired his own son to work on his campaign (oh, wait... he did!), I'm not going to complain about it. Nor would I complain if Clinton does it either.
The expenditures are public, and if the family member is doing a legitimate job at a reasonable pay (compared to market averages), then what's there to complain about?
Let me put it to you this way... my brother-in-law is an accountant. When I need accounting work done, I go to him. Why? Because I know him, trust him, and I already know he's capable of doing the job.
Oh you mean just like Dingy Harry Reid and his sons and son in law??? They have also all made millions through their corrupt daddy’s political connections.
What was it that was said about those in glass houses not throwing stones?
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/For_some_members_of_Congress_politics_0618.html
Several presidential candidates made it to CREW's list, including Reps. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif.; Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio; and Ron Paul, R-Texas. Hunter and Paul each spent more than $100,000 in salaries and reimbursements to family members, while Kucinich paid his cousin more than $35,000 for campaign consulting and fundraising between 2002 and 2004.
Doesn’t Pelosi have a few lobbyists in the family? The Clintons have some interesting relations as well. I’m sure this is the first story in a series - the Times will cover all that at a later date, closer to the primaries.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.