Thompson Adviser Has Criminal Past (here we go)

The Washington Post ^ | Nov 3, 2007 | Matthew Mosk

[RDTF]

Republican presidential candidate Fred Thompson has been crisscrossing the country since early this summer on a private jet lent to him by a businessman and close adviser who has a criminal record for drug dealing.

Thompson selected the businessman, Philip Martin, to raise seed money for his White House bid. Martin is one of four campaign co-chairmen and the head of a group called the "first day founders." Campaign aides jokingly began to refer to Martin, who has been friends with Thompson since the early 1990s, as the head of "Thompson's Airforce."

Thompson's frequent flights aboard Martin's twin-engine Cessna 560 Citation have saved him more than $100,000, because until the law changed in September, campaign-finance rules allowed presidential candidates to reimburse private jet owners for just a fraction of the true cost.

Martin entered a plea of guilty to the sale of 11 pounds of marijuana in 1979; the court withheld judgment pending completion of his probation. He was charged in 1983 with violating his probation and with multiple counts of felony bookmaking, cocaine trafficking and conspiracy. He pleaded no contest to the cocaine-trafficking and conspiracy charges, which stemmed from a plan to sell $30,000 worth of the drug, and was continued on probation.

Thompson's campaign said the candidate was not aware of the multiple criminal cases, for which Martin served no jail time. All are described in public court records.

-snip-

[CharlesWayneCT]

I’m with you.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Looks who calling other people idiots.

[freeangel]

I guess this fellow got caught when he “didn’t” inhale.

[CharlesWayneCT]

So, are you saying that a campaign should not accept any money from anybody who has ever been found guilty of any crime?

Does that include civil offense, like speeding?

We MIGHT care about candidates, but unless the donor is a criminal NOW, or is raising money illegally FOR the campaign, what difference does it make if they did drugs 24 years ago?

[CharlesWayneCT]

I wouldn’t be surprised if he didn’t know, if he’s good friends with the guy, and if so he believes the guy’s clean now. That should be good enough for us.

[CharlesWayneCT]

If you met this guy today, you would call him a scumbag to his face? What makes you pass such judgment on a man, something that he did 24 years ago and paid for?

[CharlesWayneCT]

Do you know someone who’s got nothing at all to hide in 60 years of life?

And if you do, do they also have no FRIENDS who have anything to hide in THEIR 60 years of life?

Because here we are talking about an ASSOCIATE of Fred’s who was guilty of crimes over 20 years ago, with no indication he’s done anything bad since.

[CharlesWayneCT]

We had a couple in a bible study, thought we knew them well, turned out one of them was cheating on the other, and they divorced.

In our church softball league, there was a church with a pastor who ended up being involved in a murder-for-hire scheme.

Last year at the end of my kid’s basketball league, the church had a presentation, and it turned out the guy they had speak was found to have been a druggie who also stole things and slept around.

Oh wait, that was the whole point — he had accepted Christ, and turned his life around, and now Christians were associating with him and he was using his life as a lesson.

I suppose that if anybody in that group runs for office, they better make sure they don’t “associate” with this man, or they’ll lose your vote.

[wardaddy]

that was irresponsible of the advisor

folks who have serious criminal records should not be that close to any candidate if they really care about the candidate

let your wives or kids give money maybe but stay the EFF away...geez

reminds me of Bill Clinton and Juan Corona (major Miami doper) staying in the Lincoln bedroom

[wardaddy]

that is not equivocal

[dsc]

“If you met this guy today, you would call him a scumbag to his face?”

That would depend. If the subject were, “Why he shouldn’t be a close associate to a presidential candidate,” then yes. If I were introduced to him and his wife and children at a barbeque, then it wouldn’t be necessary.

“What makes you pass such judgment on a man, something that he did 24 years ago and paid for?”

Paid how? He never did any jail time, did he? Besides, “paying for” one’s crimes doesn’t mean that one is automatically of good character.

“Do you know someone who’s got nothing at all to hide in 60 years of life?”

There’s a pretty big difference between wanking in the john as an adolescent and selling large quantities of drugs. “Nothing at all to hide” would seem to equate them.

“And if you do, do they also have no FRIENDS who have anything to hide in THEIR 60 years of life?”

I don’t have any friends who have sold large quantities of drugs, or who have friends that have.

“Because here we are talking about an ASSOCIATE of Fred’s who was guilty of crimes over 20 years ago, with no indication he’s done anything bad since.”

We’re talking about a candidate for president of the United States who has an associate of this type.

[lesser_satan]

Huckabee is a tax-raising, illegal-alien-coddling liberal douche who should be selling snake-oil at a carnival. If he gets the nomination, which won’t happen, I will vote third party.

[lesser_satan]

LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL

[dsc]

You don’t have to try *that* hard to be an ass.

[papasmurf]

October surprise?

[Fred]

How convenient, right before the big MEET THE DEPRESS with the warthog from hell Russert.

[Lancey Howard]

He shouldn’t be an advisor, but if he’s clean and the money he has earned and is raising is legit, who cares what he did 24 years ago?

Not me, that's for sure.
However, I bet the rats and Fred's primary opponents "care", because they will beat him over the head with it. Or, do you figure they'll ignore it because nobody cares?

[ansel12]

“How convenient, right before the big MEET THE DEPRESS with the warthog from hell Russert.”

---

Quite a neat little package isn’t it, with the timing and such?

I dislike those silly “they are attacking my guy because they fear him” posts.

In this case, being the Wash Post front page on the day that Fred hits the Russert show, I think that most of us identify this as an attack that the MSM reserves only for the big boy conservatives.

In other words, yes the MSM fears Fred.

[MARTIAL MONK]

When I was in college my business professors openly suggested running cocaine in order to make a "stake" or "seed money". At the time the risks were small punishment light if you were caught. You would recognize the names as many of them became nationally prominent.

The smart guys did exactly that. You would be surprised at how many legitimate businessmen got their start running the border. I wish I had been smart enough to do it.

[Brices Crossroads]

“Moral equivalence to cover Hillary’s Hsu problem when Fred starts to go after her.”

That is exactly what the plan is. But lending someone a jet and being reimbursed for it is not the equivalent of taking laundered money from the Chicoms.

Interestingly, they time it for the morning of Meet the Press, hoping to divert Fred from a discussion of the real issues. You are quite correct. If they didn’t think Fred was going to be the nominee, why would they try to make some remote criminal charge against a guy he met years later into something nefarious? The MSM is detestable. They have less integrity than Pravda in its heyday.

The good news is that GOP primary voters know this. And this little attempted hit piece will have no ill effect on Fred, but its timing will indicate to the Republican base exactly who the MSM fears the most as the opponent for its chosen candidate, Hillary.