Fred Thompson’s not-yet-official campaign hit a bump this weekend, with the Los Angeles Times citing several members of a pro-abortion group who said Thompson lobbied on their behalf.

In the “yes he did” pile of evidence, the Times gives us six sources:

  • Minutes from the board’s meeting of Sept. 14, 1991 — a copy of which DeSarno gave to The Times — say: “Judy [DeSarno] reported that the association had hired Fred Thompson Esq. as counsel to aid us in discussions with the administration” on the abortion counseling rule.
  • The word of four members of the abortion-supporting group: Judith DeSarno, who was president of the family planning association in 1991; Susan Cohen, a member of the association’s board of directors in 1991; Bill Hamilton, who then directed the Washington office of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America; Sarah L. Szanton, who worked for DeSarno as director of government relations for the family planning association.
  • The word of former Rep. Michael D. Barnes (D-Md.), “a colleague at the lobbying and law firm where Thompson worked, said that DeSarno had asked him to recommend someone for the lobbying work and that he had suggested Thompson.”

In the “no he didn’t” pile of evidence, we have Fred’s denial, as well as:

  • Thompson spokesman Mark Corallo’s observation that there are no billing records.
  • Corallo’s further explanation that another lawyer at the firm may have done the lobbying. Thompson “may have been consulted by one of [his] firm’s partners who represented this group in 1991″… it was “not unusual for one lawyer on one side of an issue to be asked to give advice to colleagues for clients who engage in conduct or activities with which they personally disagree.”
  • The word of John H. Sununu, the White House official whom the family planning group wanted to contact, said he had no memory of the lobbying and doubted it took place.

Frustratingly, the accounts divide along partisan lines, with the Democrats insisting Thompson did the lobbying, and the Republicans insisting no he didn’t.

Is it likely that this group are making up Thompson’s work out of whole cloth? Doubtful. The minutes would appear to establish that Thompson was indeed hired, and the initial blanket denial from the campaign was erroneous. But after the hiring, we don’t have much evidence that Thompson actually went to the Bush administration and tried to get them to water down their opposition to abortion.

It’s significantly problematic that every person the Times quotes would appear to have incentive to take down Thompson, as he was a pro-life senator and all of these folks are not merely pro-choice, but professional lobbyists in support of that view. If one Republican or pro-life, or pro-Fred source had been quoted on the record, “Yes, Fred did this work and it was significant” then the charge would carry a lot more weight.

The fact that this story appears in the Los Angeles Times, source of one of the most asinine and unfair attacks on Fred Thompson yet, is also gives reason to pause.

Is it conceivable that this pro-abortion group, seeing Thompson as a potentially threatening pro-life presidential candidate, would seek to derail him before he starts by making minor work from long ago – perhaps even work that Thompson did to assist an associate at his firm – sound like significant aid to promote abortions? Draw your own conclusions.