In John Hinderaker's defense of Thompson that Jennifer noted below, he writes:
In a telephone interview, he added: "There's no documents to
prove it, there's no billing records, and Thompson says he has no
recollection of it, says it didn't happen."
"The firm consulted with Fred Thompson," he said. "It is not unusual for a lawyer to give counsel at the request of colleagues, even when they personally disagree with the issue."
Why didn't he say this from the beginning rather than waiting for the media to find the hard evidence? Let me be abundantly clear once again that I could care less if Thompson did some lobbying for an abortion rights group 16 years ago. I think his eight-year pro-life record in the Senate should be more important to pro-lifers trying to assess his record on abortion. What is an issue to me is the ham-handed manner in which his campaign has handled the story.This reinforces the point James Poulos makes in his excellent piece on our main site, that it's time for Thompson to end his shadow campaign and formally throw his hat into the ring.
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.