Posted on 07/13/2007 7:48:24 AM PDT by pissant
Fred Thompson is backing off his flat denial that he once lobbied for an abortion-rights group. He now says he doesn’t remember it, but does not dispute evidence to the contrary.
The climb-down could be a significant embarrassment for a prospective candidate with a plain-spoken appeal and who has courted the GOP’s anti-abortion base, although Thompson and his advisers had signaled for several days that it was coming.
Realizing that opponents in both parties are mining his legal career for damaging ammunition, Thompson also is engaging in a bit of preemption. He writes in a column posted Wednesday by the conservative Power Line blog: “[I]f a client has a legal and ethical right to take a position, then you may appropriately represent him as long as he does not lie or otherwise conduct himself improperly while you are representing him. In almost 30 years of practicing law I must have had hundreds of clients and thousands of conversations about legal matters. Like any good lawyer, I would always try to give my best, objective and professional opinion on any legal question presented to me.”
The abortion-rights issue arose when the Los Angeles Times reported last week that Thompson had “accepted a lobbying assignment” from the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, which wanted the administration of President George H.W. Bush to relax a restriction on federal payments to clinics that offered abortion counseling.
Thompson spokesman Mark Corallo told the Times in an e-mail: “Fred Thompson did not lobby for this group, period.” The Times said minutes from a board meeting of the group suggested otherwise.
On Thursday, Corallo offered a less sweeping comment about Thompson and the group: “He has no recollection of doing any work for this group. And since he was of counsel and not a member of the firm, it was not unusual for the firm’s partners to trot their clients in to meet him, get his views and even some advice.”
So the difference may boil down to how you define “lobbying.” It has been clear for several days that Thompson was not going to stick with a complete denial. When an Associated Press reporter asked him about the matter this weekend at the Young Republicans National Convention, he deflected with one of his folksy observations: “I’d just say the flies get bigger in the summertime. I guess the flies are buzzing.”
Then in an interview with Sean Hannity that was reported by Thomas B. Edsall of The Huffington Post, Thompson was even more evasive: “You need to separate a lawyer who is advocating a position from the position itself.”
The former “Law and Order” actor has an anti-abortion voting record as a U.S. senator from Tennessee, but some statements he made early in his political career have led some conservatives to question whether he once had favored abortion rights.
The lobbying controversy illustrates the harsh scrutiny that awaits Thompson when he formally kicks off his campaign, and shows the difficulty of trying to answer high-stakes questions without a full campaign infrastructure.
Thompson aides say they do not believe the brouhaha has hurt him with Republican voters. “Consider the source,” said one Thompson adviser. “Conservatives don’t pay much attention to liberal groups that say they want to help, and tell them why their guy isn’t as great as they think.”
The lobbying story is one of several recent pieces criticizing Thompson, and advisers are now considering pushing back his announcement even further. They had planned to schedule the announcement before an Aug. 5 debate in Des Moines, Iowa, but now are considering jumping in even later than that.
The advisers say they realize how searing the scrutiny will be and want to be ready. And they want to have more of their staff in place. Thompson has to convince skeptics he’s ready for the race and ready for the job, and hopes that a top-flight campaign operation will help make that case. The announcement date will be based on factors that include IRS regulations governing when Thompson will have to disclose the millions of dollars he has already raised.
Thompson says in the Power Line column that he had “half dozen or so lobbying clients.” His column concludes: ‘I’m certainly not surprised that such a diverse career is being mined by others. As we get further into this political season we will undoubtedly see the further intersection of law, politics and the mainstream media.”
I am not a Thompson fan, but these remarks are excellent. Thank you for the post.
I hope not.
I'm not impressed by him or what he's done.
I say this because in the past I've never heard him rail against this ever growing government or our lawless borders. Before this current up coming election, never have I seen him stand up in Congress or anywhere else, and voice outrage at the state of affairs in this country.
Some people just keep saying, "Boy, I hope Fred is the next President". And that's it.
What's he done? Where is the leadership? Has he stood up in Congress or anywhere else, and pounded on the tables demanding less government and secured borders?
If he has, please post the link to the video.
Following are some of Thompson's remarks fighting for the balanced budget amendment. He passionately advocated it
Wait a minute here. You offered up a June 5, 1996 statement he made directed at President Clinton?
Come one man, this is almost 2008. Do you have anything from this era? The state of affairs in regards to our lawless bordes and ever expanding goverment under BUSH has EXPLODED.
Yet you provide me with something Thompson said directed at Clinton 11 years ago?
You've got to do better than that.
Can you show me something Thompson has stated in the past 4 years that will clearly show his anger and outrage over this monstrous growing government and our out of control, lawless borders?
Besides a Hollywood movie, is there a video somewhere that will show him banging on the podium, voicing his outrage and demanding something be done?
Post the link.
You’re very welcome! There’s more where that came from — let me know if there’s a particular issue that interests you, and I’d be glad to try to track down if Thompson said anything about it. (Definition of a dork = someone who spends Friday night on THOMAS.gov = me).
Best FReegards.
For me, the things Thompson actually did in the Senate (and what he said on the Senate floor in support of what he did) are very telling, because they give us a view into his real principles. What he’s said during this testing the waters phase of his candidacy is in line with what he said back in the Senate — I posted his Senate remarks because they’re much more in-depth and extensive than what you’ll get in a campaign speech or interview. Your willingness to write them off as irrelevant indicates to me that you’re not really interested in the info — so good luck to you.
Obviously, even though Harriet was selecting judges left, right and center for the President to put forward.
Double standards. Knee-jerk types as are often seen nowadays on FR see what they want to see, not what the facts dictate. People here love Fred and hated Harriet even though they had similar evolutions on abortion. Very undeveloped thinking.
rgr that,, and of course he would have slammed Ronald Reagan who actually passed pro abortion rights while he was governor
That was the best you could find?
With respect, I was not looking for long winded, years old, dated material, that was rambling at best.
I did not write them off, and only asked for relevant material. You posted very dated material, years old, much of which was directed at then President Clinton. Come on.
Honestly, nothing you posted impressed me in the least.
Years old speeches in the Senate don't cut it. I simply asked for someone to show me Thompson's outrage over this expanding government and our lawless borders. I wanted to see, as a representative, where his outrage was, and where he was demanding something be done.
If we're going to chose a president, this time we'd better chose one with some fire in the belly, one who is genuinely outraged over expanding government, and our chaotic, lawless borders.
Otherwise, conservatives will lose big in 08.
btt
oh good grief. You’re delusional if you think Duncan Hunter has a snowball’s chance.
bttt
Honestly, I think your comment was a bit rambling. If you want to read info about any of the candidates, it’s easy enough to find.
Right. That's why I currently favor Hunter by a nose.
Reading all comments with interest.
This is what he said from the beginning.
You’re right. He did. Strange this is a being posted as a new story.
Not strange at all. They're trying the 'death by a thousand cuts' on Fred.
Aggravation and a podium to boot.
Fred Thompson speaks to Lincoln Club
4 minutes 10 seconds in. Talks about the problem of growing government posing risks to national security.
Thompson’s arguments against the export act, discussing important national security threats and delivered on Sept. 4, 2001 were directed against Bush.
Thompson’s recent statements on these issues are widely available here on FR — if you’re interested, just go through the key word index and you’ll find them (or browse the fredthompson index). It’s not worthwhile for me to find them for you, because you and I apparently differ on what’s impressive and important. So, it’s best that you look and judge for yourself. If nothing in those speeches impressed you in the least, I also suspect we differ so greatly in priorities that I wouldn’t be able to help you even if I had time.
FReegards.
Nah, Miers’ problem was that she didn’t have the appropriate background in our Founding documents and history.
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.