What a Lawyer thinks about WaPo's newest hit piece

From Paul at Power Line:

Today's Washington Post has a front-page story about Fred Thompson called "No Easy Verdict on Thompson The Lawyer: Cases Indicate Willingness to Defy GOP
Orthodoxy." The title is just plain silly. A lawyer's duty is always to his client, not to any political orthodoxy. Had Thompson not been willing to "defy GOP orthodoxy" when necessary to promote his client's interest (as where he argued against a search that found incriminating evidence), he would have violated the rules of his profession. Moreover, most of the legal positions the Post actually cites (e.g., having a client invoke the Fifth Amendment, winning reinstatement for an employee) do not defy any political orthodoxy.

Thompson's legal career as described by the Post has no implications for this election. We simply see an able lawyer fulfilling his ethical obligation through vigorous and often successful representation of those who put their trust in him.

Read the rest at the link above. It also talks about tort reform.

So, they are using the old "Fred is bad, because he is a good lawyer" bit.

I have notice something interesting with the attacks:

When they slam him about social issues he is nothing more than a dumb, lazy actor. When it is about something like this he is a shrewed, intelligent, hardworking lawyer.

Win, Fred, Win