Josh Patashnik returns to the question of whether Bill Clinton and his team really refused to let Casey deliver a pro-life speech at the party convention in 1992. He says the evidence suggests that they did not block him from speaking for that reason. I think that a fuller look at the evidence suggests that they did do what Casey alleged. (For example, Paul Begala, cited for the Clinton defense, hasn’t kept his story straight.) I don’t think it would have been the worst thing in the world if the Democrats in charge had said openly that they weren’t interested in letting someone take issue with the party platform from the podium. But they seem intent on denying that they did what they appear to have done.