Thompson’s pro-choice client — redux

We learned over the weekend that the pro-choice National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Assn. reportedly hired Thompson to lobby the H.W. Bush White House in 1991. Specifically, the group paid Thompson quite a bit of money to push the White House to ease restrictions that barred abortion counseling at clinics that received federal money.

Except, at least at first, the Thompson campaign denied that this had ever happened. On the one side, we have six people and documented evidence that Thompson lobbied for the group. On the other, we have Team Thompson, which insisted, vigorously, that the entire story is fantasy, fabricated out of whole cloth. Thompson spokesman Mark Corallo said, “Fred Thompson did not lobby for this group, period.”

Thompson backers and Republican observers in general rallied to the former senator’s defense. They might be a little embarrassed today.

Fred Thompson has effectively admitted in an interview with Sean Hannity that he did lobby in behalf of a pro-abortion rights group.

Hannity served up a chest-high, 25 mph softball: “They have attacked you, they have attacked your family, and now, they come out in the Los Angeles Times with a piece that says you lobbied for abortion rights. You say that’s absolutely not true.” […]

All Thompson had to do was say to Hannity, “You’re damned right.” Instead, he answered as follows:

“You need to separate a lawyer who is advocating a position from the position itself.” Hmm. Then: “They will probably come at me, in 35 years of law practice, with some people, I represented criminal defendants. I was a prosecutor. I had a general practice. So that in and of itself doesn’t mean anything anyway.”

So, on Saturday, the official Thompson line is, “This didn’t happen.” On Wednesday, the official Thompson line is, “It doesn’t mean anything.”

Note to conservatives: standing up for Thompson can lead to considerable embarrassment.

For that matter, is it me or does Thompson’s line need a little work?

High-priced, corporate lobbyists, such as Thompson, could pick and choose wealthy clients with ease. Criminal defense attorneys have responsibilities to the system to defend offensive clients. DC lobbyists have no similar duties — if Thompson doesn’t want to lobby for the pro-choice National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Assn, he could turn them down. At this point, the evidence suggests he didn’t, and instead took their money to advance their cause.

Besides, it’s a little late for Thompson to try and argue that he took on a client he disagreed with. He denied the story. His office was categorical about it. As I suggested the other day, getting away with lobbying for a pro-choice client is a minor challenge. Getting caught lying about it can dog a presidential campaign for quite a while.

For what it’s worth, Hannity was as shameless as you’d expect him to be.

If ever an answer demanded a follow-up, this fit the bill. As both former Watergate counsel Thompson and news crusader Hannity know, Thompson’s “you need to separate a lawyer who is advocating a position from the position itself” indicates that something is going on that needs a little more exploration.

Hannity, however, must have missed that. Instead, before ending the interview, he allowed Thompson to declare; “I’m not going to get down in the weeds with everything they dredge up over the next six months. In terms of being a target, all I can say is, they know who to be afraid of.”

Getting down in the weeds = telling people the truth. Definitely the kind of thing Hannity wants to avoid.

Update: It wasn’t just Hannity; Thompson also implicitly acknowledged the pro-choice lobbying work in a column he sent to Powerline, a far-right blog.

Yeah, we’re afraid of a guy who’s still backing the biggest military disaster ever, when the polls are 70/30 against his stupidity.

Right.

  • Only if Fred could pitch. The spin on that sucker was tighter than a 100mph Fastball.

    Maybe Nixon was right. Fred is a dumbass.

  • I expect better of the Huffinton Post.

    “Pro-abortion rights group”????

    “Pro-abortion” is a right-wing term.

    The Red Chinese are “pro-abortion”: they want them more than live births.
    I don’t know any pro-abortion people, personally. At the most, they are abortion-indifferent. Most are “pro-life” in that they would support publicly funded pre-natal care and WIC programs that produce happy, healthy children if they were asked, unlike the anti-abortion folks calling themselves “Pro’life” but care little what happens to a child that’s left the womb.

    The PROPER term is “abortion rights group” putting the “Pro” in there wasn’t very PROfessional.

  • Fair and balanced.
    Them and us.
    They and you.

    Oh how Sean loves to fawn:

    They have attacked you, they have attacked your family, and now, they come out in the Los Angeles Times with a piece that says you lobbied for abortion rights. You say that’s absolutely not true.”

  • (Reaching for the Zantac and the Excedrin)

    Fred Thompson is so wrong in so many ways, I don’t know where to start, and the problem is not just with Fred, but with the people covering him, many of whom seem to be trying to manipulate all of this so that he ends up as the GOP nominee. Why, I don’t know, as whoever the nominees are going to be, they should at least be ones who don’t make you want to be sure your passport is current.

    So, Fred finally ‘fessed up, like all the other cowardly Republicans, on a right-wing show, with a friendly face. How courageous.

    I’m guessing that there is a treasure trove of trash on Thompson, and if the media decides that Fred is the one, they will give him a pass on all of it.

    You see what has happened with McCain – they’ve decided he’s not the one, so he can’t open his mouth, or make a move that someone isn’t there to make a big deal out of it.

    I’m so sick of bieng played by the media to accept mediocre and incompetent candidates.

  • What Anne said.

    The media is what makes the Freddy the Faker charade possible. They’re the ones who decided Bush’s intelligence was unimportant, and they decided that “likeability” was the important thing. Gore was boring. Bush was likable. And now they’re at it again.

    Die, scum.

    Just die.

  • Someone will have to remind me if & how John Edwards’ legal clients were used against him, and further remind me if & how Fred Thompson wasn’t around to muster his “hey, lawyers are lawyers” defense for his one-time Senate colleague.

  • Given enough time, Freddie may finally come up with the “right” and wingnut-pleasing answer:
    “Yes, I did take the money from the baby killers but then lobbied *against* them. It’s no sin to betray the enemy”

  • Why doesn’t someone check into the charge that Fred Thompson wanted the whole Republican platform throwed out in 1996 especially the pro-life plank.

    Fredheads swallowed the Rove koolaid on Thompson and some are still defending and looking funnier by the minute.

    Now Thompson saying he probably won’t announce until September so he gets to avoid another debate. The man is an empty suit that in a debate would look even worse. He wants to blog. He went to Hannity’s military deal in GA and never once did Thompson talk about the military according to reports. Hannity should be ashamed — he didn’t mind asking Rudy the tough questions but softballs for Fred. Not very professional IMO.

  • Comments are closed.