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.”
Just don’t post that. It has a history of getting pulled. LOL
This article is taking a legal statement about how legal representation works and twisting it to say he did actually work for this firm.
I understand. I posted Fred’s Powerline piece yesterday too.
Now i could go for Daffy.
Oh...I forgot the “official” excuse. Fred wasn’t trying help Aristide get back in power (even though the form he signed says this) but was fighting to end the embargo (even thouugh the form he signed doesn’t mention this).
Because given 3 opportunities to deny doing this work, he hasn’t. Looks a bit fishy, in light of his campaign manger’s blanket denial.
A man’s gotta put bread on the table.
You don’t help Duncan Hunter by constantly getting on the Fred Threads and bashing him without any rational reason to do so.
As I think I said to another Hunter supporter the other day, I think he’s a good man. But he will only get into the race if he gets his numbers up. And he will only get his numbers up if his supporters show that he is the best candidate and that he can win.
Bashing Rudy or Mitt or Fred only means that one of the other of these three will profit. The single digit candidates will remain single digits unless they do something POSITIVE to break out of the pack.
In other words, you are only annoying people and gaining nothing by it.
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.
I’m with the FREDeration,but I like the Hunter too...
Thompson/Hunter is a winning ticket IMHO.
If I’m annoying you, fine.
You annoy me with your tapdancing for Fred.
As for Hunter, I’ve posted scores of articles in recent weeks and months about his stellar qualifications. So many that he now only trails Fred on FR 60-40. Looking for 50-50 in a few weeks.
And btw, I posted this article, so it is you who are coming on and complaining, not the other way around.
ran20 wrote: “The dems will have a field day if Fred wins the nomination.”
The only “field day” the Dems will have after Fred wins the GOP nomination will be to get their butts kicked off of the playing field.
Hill’s high negatives against Fred’s much lower negatives. Her shrill fingernails-on-a-blackboard screech against Fred’s smooth-as-12-year-old-bourbon deep, mellow voice.
Hill’s for big socialist government, higher taxes, illegal amnesty, abortion on demand, abandoning our friends in the mideast,ignoring the WOT and hoping it will go away, grabbing your guns and taking away your property for the good of the state.
Fred’s for smaller government, lower taxes, secure borders, SCOTUS judges who will send Roe back to the states, victory in the mideast, killing terrorists, protecting your RKBA and defending your property rights.
No contest. McGovern-type landslide.
Her Senate record versus his? Fred wins!
Her past versus his? Voters will be reminded of crooked land deals, missing Rose law firm records, Travelgate, Whitewater, Monica & other bimbo eruptions, obstruction of justice, loss of Bubba’s law license, a lot of people who perished under strange circumstances, Roger Clinton’s nose candy, socialized medicine, rape charges, etc. The Hildabeast loses hands down!
What do you think...?
Thompson/Hunter vs. Clinton/Edwards....
Something tells me that’s how it will end up. Two winners against two losers.
I'm just curious: would you cut Rudy, McCain, or Romney so much slack if one of them claimed to have forgotten or would have you concluded he was lying?
What troubles me about this is that if Fred is such an abortion foe, why wasn't he immediately and greatly conflicted? This should have been a moral dilemma of first rank; not the kind of thing you easily forget. I'm hoping this is an isolated event and not the first of a series of events where Fred sets aside his convictions for convenience's sake.
This one event (even if proven to be true) doesn't change my positive opinion of Fred Thompson but it does make me uneasy.
Seriously, if this is the best the opposition can offer, this is going to be a cakewalk for Thompson.
This is probably just the opening salvo. Why would the opposition open fire until the candidate is clearly in the race?
But the msm keeps pointing out that Rudy was loved at Regent university, and he was leading in polls of Evangelicals...
Rudy’s electorial problem is that he and the Hildebeast will be competing for the same voters....
Duncan Hunter has always been favored by Freepers. The question is, can he be nominated? To do that, you and his other active supporters need to get the word out and get his numbers up.
The most critical thing now, I should think, is to keep him in the race as some of the also-rans drop out of it. That means that he needs to beat out folks like Ron Paul and Tancredo, not Fred, Mitt, or Giuliani. He needs to survive into the time when they cut down on the numbers invited to the debates, putting him into the final four.
I happen to think that Giuliani is the worst candidate of the bunch, for instance, but realistically he is likely to remain in the race until the convention, simply because that’s where his numbers put him.
No harm in posting this article, since we should be aware of what’s being said. But frankly it doesn’t say anything much except that this Politico writer is getting anxious about Fred doing too well.
You gotta be kidding me. FDT has a 100% solid pro-life voting record.
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.