Fred’s first wife’s family are rock-ribbed, influential Republicans. They got Fred his political appointments, and helped him in his political career. They probably like his politics, as does his first wife. She wouldn’t be the first wronged wife to keep silent for political reasons.
I think the brother’s answer was pretty clear, viewed in context. I could be wrong, I admit, but I think the chances are small.
I’m really surprised, though, that so many people who consider themselves religious think that promiscuity is okay, though, just because a man is single.
I think you are right to say that his first wife’s family supports him politically, and for that reason they have refused to discuss whether or not Fred Thompson was unfaithful in his first marriage. But we should not take their silence as a confirmation of infidelity.
If I am convicted of robbing a the First National Bank, I could go to jail for a long time, so I have a strong reason to say that I did not rob the bank. But if the police ask me if I robbed the bank and I say “no”, my interest in saying “no” should not be used as evidence to indicate that I actually did rob the bank.
As to the matter of Fred Thompson’s activities while he was not married, to me there is a difference between marital infidelilty and sexual promiscuity outside of marriage. The factual question of marital infidelity is still up in the air, as far as I can tell, and we are all just speculating on that point.
If you wish to change the discussion to sexual promiscuity outside of marriage, though, I think we are on pretty safe ground there. I don’t think anybody will go to the mat saying Fred Thompson led a monk’s life between his two marriages.