[new yorker 77]

The headline is FAKE.

The article shows no evidence that Thompson lobbied for anything.

Thompson was part of a huge firm and the firm did something, therefore, Thompson did it.

The AP lied.

How could he be toast if the AP lied?

Furthermore, how could Thompson be toast against a Democrat that would make it the law of the land to have partial birth abortions on demand.

Will Pro-Life voters really allow partial birth abortions to happen by rejecting Thompson over hearsay?

I missed that in bible study.

[pissant]

I said “if true”.

Minutes of a Sept. 14, 1991, meeting of the association, cited by the newspaper, states: “Judy (DeSarno) reported that the Association had hired Fred Thompson, Esq., as counsel to aid us in discussions with the administration.”

If that is not true, then there is not a problem.

[gov_bean_ counter]

I seem to recall the same bilge being pumped up about Roberts during his confirmation for the sole purpose of turning Conservatives against him. Old playbook.

[dannyboy72]

This is yet another post by the Duncan Hunter brigade. Mr. Hunter may be a good man but he is not in the league of Thompson and this just feeds into the notion of the Duncanites “nipping” at the heels of a good man because they can’t stand toe to toe with Thompson.

Sorry pissant but Thompson is a better candidate. Perhaps Duncan can be more useful in the house leadership, but he is not presidential material - in my opinion.