Posted on 07/07/2007 9:54:02 PM PDT by pissant
Imagine you're the district attorney character on, say, television's long-running "Law and Order." You have five witnesses who say they either saw the accused, or learned contemporaneously, that the accused did the alleged bad thing.
Then imagine the accused's defense is essentially a variant of "I don't recall. There's no paper trail. Nope, I didn't do it." And the accused has a friendly witness who at first doesn't recollect if the accused did the bad thing, then ratchets up to "It didn't happen."
If you're the DA, you probably still think you've got a case, right? Maybe you'll just let the jury decide.
That appears to be where we're at in case of The People v. Fred Thompson, the people being family-planning types who say they hired Thompson to lobby the first Bush White House to overturn an anti-abortion executive order. The story was broken by Michael Finnegan of the Los Angeles Times.
Thompson, the former Tennessee Republican senator who appears to be running for president even though he hasn't yet officially announced, says, through a spokesperson, he didn't do the lobbying at all back in 1991. That's a surprise to the family-planning folks who say that's exactly what they hired him to do back during his Washington lobbyist days, to specifically lobby then-White House chief of staff John Sununu.
This matters, of course, because Thompson has been wooing the anti-abortion activists and social conservatives so important to winning the Republican nomination. They're on the jury.
If this story gains legs, that increases Thompson's challenge in winning over that group. If the people who recall signing on Thompson to lobby the first Bush White House are seen as more credible, Thompson will not only suffer with those opposed to abortion but also more generallly because his truthfulness will become
(Excerpt) Read more at weblogs.chicagotribune.com ...
That may be true, but Dubya DID have a DWI, regardless of the source.
Interesting analogy you've made but it really doesn't mean much. Can you quote every conversation you had on those projects? Can you quote every conversation you've had with associates about other projects? If you can say "Yes" I bet you can walk on water too.
No. But i can tell you if I was hired by a group, as is alleged, to perform services. Might not recall Joe Schmo, but I will recall if I designed his project.
I know people close to Fred. This is a load of crap that going to blow up in their faces.
What was written about Planned Parenthood? What do you mean?
You might be right. But it better be false.
What is your point? I=f it’s a beer right now, I’ll understand, but attacking a GOP front-runner is uncharacteristic of you. Who do you want to win the Presidency?
I was hired to wash a car today. That doesn’t mean I like cars or washing them. Just means I have to earn a living, and today I earned it washing a car.
Fred’s gotta deal with this in a definitive way. His supporters the accusers left wingers ain’t gonna work. All MSM is a pit of left wing vipers.
Fred’s my #2 guy. If he lied about this, he’ll be my #11.
Washing cars perhaps. But if you were hired to give your fat neighbor a butt massage, you’d think twice, no?
It doesn’t sound like that at all. He adamantly denies that Thompson lobbied anyone on their behalf.
Sununu says that it never happened too. Is he supposed to be lying along with Fred to cover up this idiotic non-story about a lobbyist for hire lobbying someone? If he had done lobbying for them, he would have just said so. A few of the hand wringers such as yourself might have used it as a propaganda tool, (yeah, I know, he’s supposedly your number two and you do a good job of seeming just reasonable enough, but frankly, the whole charade smells like a steaming load of a different kind of number two...) but really nobody else would give a damn.
People need lawyers. Lawyers take on clients. That doesn’t mean they support what the client wants. It’s a paying job.
Now, at this point, after denying it, if it were proven true, it would be horrible. There’s no reason to think that would be the case though.
Fair Enough, But I don’t believe Fred’s a liar! He’s got a temper but that is a good quality in my book for anyone that wants to be President. Let’ see how this plays out...
Duncan Hunter is a good man, yet his electability will hurt his chances along with many other candidates.
Listen. Fred is my #2. If Hunter drops out, right now he would be my #1. Not as enthusiastic as you, but I certainly would want him to beat back Rudy and McCain. But since he is all the rage right now, we better vet him well. He’a already got some fairly major baggage. Not anything like Rudy McRomney though, and he has a track record of reasonably good conservative credentials. Hence he is many conservative’s first choice. Hopefully this will blow over and the snakes will be revealed as the snakes they are (LA Times). But its already a media firestorm (ah, the benefits of being a frontrunner) and it will have to be slayed.
If Duncan can get enough mo to become a top tier guy in the primary, things will take care of themselves.
I don’t think Fred is a liar either. Unless someone proves that he is, I will continue to assume that. If this is all teh LA Times has, he’ll be fine.
that’s it ? that’s your best shot on Fred ?
This charge should be easy enough to prove one way or the other. Family Planning can sign a release to Thompson, and he can request Family Planning bank records to see if Family Planning paid him. Also, his Lobbying firm can produce records of what he worked on during that period of time (they bill like lawyers, don’t they, work is tracked by client?).
Isn’t this the way the left attacked Clarence Thomas? Some skank erupted out of the ooze and pointed a slime-dripping finger with no proof. All the evidence was against her and still the media said she was believable.
Isn’t this the way the left attacked Ahhnold when he ran for governor? Some skank erupted out of the ooze and pointed a slime-dripping finger with no proof. She had no evidence, and he said it was so long ago he didn’t remember her.
Do I see a pattern?
No, he doesn’t. The burden of proof is on the “family planning” group, which hasn’t presented any billing records or cancelled checks. That’s the only way they can say with any credibility that Fred did any work for them. The minutes from a meeting where DeSarno SAYS she hired Fred don’t quite rise to the level of convincing proof.
This kind of crap is to be expected of liberal Democrats who donated to Hillary’s campaign, but to see Duncan Hunter’s alleged supporters so willing to side with them in their attempted smear of Fred makes me want to throw up. You guys really are pieces of work.
“This matters, of course, because Thompson has been wooing the anti-abortion activists and social conservatives so important to winning the Republican nomination. They’re on the jury.
If this story gains legs, that increases Thompson’s challenge in winning over that group.”
Hardly. Seems they’ve got a litany of excuses for justifying every unacceptable red flag that pops up about Fred Thompson, just exactly doing like the Rudybots did.
Does this sound like "I don't recall??!"
"Thompson spokesman Mark Corallo adamantly denied that Thompson worked for the family planning group. "
Please, don't add to the lying and distortions.
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.