BREAKING: Fred Thompson billing records prove, lobbied for pro-choice tent, CASE CLOSED

[Grebrook]

Remember all that fun conservatives had trying to prove that Jamil Hussein, a confidential inside source for the AP in IRaq who was reporting massacres against Sunnis, didn't really exist? Oh they were gleeful and hysterical. Until it turned out that Michelle Malkin was full of shit and the IRaqi government revealed that he did exist (and actually tried to prosecute him).

Now, once again, after conservatives spent the last couple of weeks claiming the "liberal" L.A. Times and NYT were "lying" that their hero, empty-suit Fred Thompson (whom Richard Nixon said was "pretty dumb", and no, I'm not making that up) actually lobbied for a pro-choice group back in the day. Showing once again the stripes of hypocrisy for another leading GOP candidate, and the endless stupidity of the conservative blogosphere. Malkin was once again leading the pack in claiming the L.A. Times was lying. However, the New York Times has revealed his billing records, and now the argument is over.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/19/us/politics/19thompson.html?_r=3&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

[tblue]

1. Bwaaaaaaahaaaaaaaa!!! Buh-bye, Freddie! Keep your day job.

[Nite Owl]

2. I'm sure he will have repented

and now it's all ok. The dumber that they are the more the right wingers love them and they ain't got anyone else!

[Crunchy Frog]

7. Yes. He's prayed to Gawd for forgiveness

so it's all water under the bridge now.

[TwilightGardener]

3. LOL! They were all over this at Free Republic the last few weeks, calling

the story a lie. And then ol' Fredhorn Leghorn basically admitted his involvement with them (on Hannity), saying that "you have to separate the lawyer from the group he's defending"--except that he wasn't defending them, he was LOBBYING for them! In other words, that whole "I don't recall" bullshit was just that--he tried to explain away something he said he couldn't recall! Gives me such pleasure to see such a fucking scumbag caught up in his own lies.

[The Count]

4. This will bug his base more than sabotaging Watergate. needs spreading!

[ProgressiveEconomist]

5. T: 'in light of lawyer-client confidentiality ... not appropriate for him to respond'

From the NY Times link in the OP:

'In a column published on the conservative blog Powerline, Mr. Thompson wrote that in light of lawyer-client confidentiality, it would not be appropriate for him to respond to those who are �dredging up clients � or another lawyer�s clients � that I may have represented or consulted with� 15 or 20 years ago.'

[TwilightGardener]

6. He's taking the fifth! Hi-larious.

[merh]

10. Guess the lawyer is just hiding behind a legal technicality that doesn't exist

The ABA Rules:

Model Rules of Professional Conduct

Client-Lawyer Relationship
Rule 1.6 Confidentiality Of Information

(a) A lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent, the disclosure is impliedly authorized in order to carry out the representation or the disclosure is permitted by paragraph (b).
(b) A lawyer may reveal information relating to the representation of a client to the extent the lawyer reasonably believes necessary:

* (1) to prevent reasonably certain death or substantial bodily harm;
(2) to prevent the client from committing a crime or fraud that is reasonably certain to result in substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another and in furtherance of which the client has used or is using the lawyer's services;
(3) to prevent, mitigate or rectify substantial injury to the financial interests or property of another that is reasonably certain to result or has resulted from the client's commission of a crime or fraud in furtherance of which the client has used the lawyer's services;
(4) to secure legal advice about the lawyer's compliance with these Rules;
(5) to establish a claim or defense on behalf of the lawyer in a controversy between the lawyer and the client, to establish a defense to a criminal charge or civil claim against the lawyer based upon conduct in which the client was involved, or to respond to allegations in any proceeding concerning the lawyer's representation of the client; or
(6) to comply with other law or a court order.

The client gave informed consent, discussed the meetings and the representation, gave the minutes to the press and has said that he represented them.

He has lied and he is just another good ole boy DC insider, hiding from the issues.

[merh]

8. That good ole boy, Washington insider.

Thompson fits in so well with the folks in Washington, trying to claim lawyer-client confidentiality (attorney/client privilege) and not say anything about his lobbying efforts.

I've got news for the lawyer, once the client releases the information, as the Family Planning group did, there is no attorney/client privilege. The privilege does not belong to the attorney, it belongs to the client.


Yup, he is one of the gold ole boys of DC :P

[JacquesMolay]

9. Another legend bites the dust. And I thought he really believed. ..

... in the cause. The moral of the story is: Never play to the center in a mob of people who don't believe in evolution.