Monday, December 26, 2011

Gingrich Ethics Violation Smears: Palinized, Innocent by IRS Violated No Laws


board comments


And what was his unpardonable crime? Teaching a course? C’mon dude.

The IRS cleared the organizations involved and by implication cleared Gingrich. It was pure and complete politics that Newt took a way out of.

Holy crap, what a bunch of small potatoes. Hell, Obama got half his cash last time from overseas. They went after Newt hard with 85 alleged violations and 84 were bullshit and 1 led to a reprimand. Hell, clinton was censured and the Dems would him back in in a heartbeat. You’re bailing out a rowboat with a dixie cup, my FRiend

For those who don’t know politicians are sanctioned crooks. The trick is to find the one with more integrity than the other one. We know what they are and accept it, to some extent. This has always been the case. If you consider this example some litmus case on Gingrich then you’re naive. The msm lays on conservatives and covers for liberals. This article reads like the absurd. And the actual issue was absurd. Hard to believe you were a JAG.

“Rep. Mark Sanford (R-S.C.) said that had he known what was in the ethics committee’s report, he would not have voted for Gingrich as speaker. “The gray got grayer when you read the report,” he said. “When I think of my three boys and what kind of example I want to set for them for leadership in this country, gray is not the example.”
Wow, is that the pot calling the kettle black or not. The recently discredited governor with his South American lover. I’m sure if the SC voters would have known he was a philanderer, they wouldn’t have voted for him as governor. Unfortunately all of the idiots are not in the DimCrap party.
However, don’t misinterpret this as a defense of Newt, who may well be ne(u)wtered before all this race is over.

To: fightinJAG; All
For those who don’t know, Newt exposed House Speaker Jim Wright (D) and Wright was forced out:
In 1988 Wright became the target of an inquiry by the House Ethics Committee. Their report in early 1989 implied that he had used bulk purchases of his book, ‘Reflections of a Public Man’, to earn speaking fees in excess of the allowed maximum, and that his wife, Betty, was given a job and perks to avoid the limit on gifts.
Faced with an increasing loss of effectiveness, Wright tendered his resignation as Speaker on May 31, 1989, the resignation to become effective on the selection of a successor. He was the first Speaker to resign because of a scandal.
Democrats had held for 40 years (1954). When Newt became Speaker (1994) the Democrats wanted revenge and they got it.
We are all guilty of breaking some federal regulation - it’s just a matter of who wants to enforce it and why

THE IRS FOUND HIM TO BE INNOCENT OF THE CHARGES AGAINST HIM ... HE VIOLATED NO LAWS!!!! If you’re going to pontificate, at least get your facts straight!

18 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:43:47 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by KalaSam

Curiously you didn’t mention the other 84 bogus charges that were filed against Newt & subsequently dropped. He was Palinized before there was such a term. You also failed to mention the IRS cleared him of all charges after his departure.
The dems have been famous for these tactics for years. Have you denounced these tactics........except for ONE instance against Newt? They were wrong all the other times against Newt & MANY others except this once? Do you really not see the pattern?
And what was his unpardonable crime? Teaching a course? C’mon dude.

20 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:45:58 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Confab


Skip to comments.
House Reprimands, Penalizes Speaker (Flashback)
WaPo ^ | Jan.22, 1997 | John E. Yang 
Posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:16:15 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by fightinJAG
comment:  To: fightinJAG
Are you a Ron Paul nutter spreading that crazy “ Blame America for 9-11 “crazy man's Newt Smears here ?? 
21 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:49:52 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by ncalburt (
The House voted overwhelmingly yesterday to reprimand House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and order him to pay an unprecedented $300,000 penalty, the first time in the House's 208-year history it has disciplined a speaker for ethical wrongdoing.

The ethics case and its resolution leave Gingrich with little leeway for future personal controversies, House Republicans said. Exactly one month before yesterday's vote, Gingrich admitted that he brought discredit to the House and broke its rules by failing to ensure that financing for two projects would not violate federal tax law and by giving the House ethics committee false information.
"Newt has done some things that have embarrassed House Republicans and embarrassed the House," said Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.). "If [the voters] see more of that, they will question our judgment."

[snip]

The 395 to 28 vote closes a tumultuous chapter that began Sept. 7, 1994, when former representative Ben Jones (D-Ga.), then running against Gingrich, filed an ethics complaint against the then-GOP whip. . . .
[snip]

House ethics committee members took pride in yesterday's bipartisan resolution of the case. "We have proved to the American people that no matter how rough the process is, we can police ourselves, we do know right from wrong," said Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.), who headed the investigative subcommittee that charged Gingrich.

[snip]

For Gingrich, it was another humbling event in a remarkable series of peaks and valleys since 1994.
[snip]

In a strongly worded report, special counsel James M. Cole concluded that Gingrich had violated tax law and lied to the investigating panel, but the subcommittee would not go that far. In exchange for the subcommittee agreeing to modify the charges against him, Gingrich agreed to the penalty Dec. 20 as part of a deal in which he admitted guilt.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
========================================================
The parts this guy didn't snip:


But some lawmakers said the $300,000 financial penalty, described as a reimbursement to the ethics committee for the additional cost Gingrich caused it when he gave it false information, was too severe.

"I was willing to swallow hard and vote for the reprimand, but when they add the $300,000 assessment . . . that's excessive," said House Government Reform and Oversight Committee Chairman Dan Burton (R-Ind.), one of three committee chairmen to vote against the punishment.

Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), who cast the lone dissenting vote on the ethics committee, said of Gingrich's violations: "They are real mistakes but they shouldn't be hanging offenses."

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) gave a spirited speech calling the penalty unwarranted. Answering those who said a speaker should be held to a higher standard of ethical conduct, DeLay said: "The highest possible standard does not mean an impossible standard no American could possibly reach." He closed by declaring: "Let's stop this madness, let's stop the cannibalism."

The last phrase echoed the May 31, 1989, resignation speech of House Speaker Jim Wright (D-Tex.), who called on lawmakers "to bring this period of mindless cannibalism to an end." Wright resigned in an ethics scandal triggered by a complaint filed by Gingrich.

Despite the partisanship that surrounded the Gingrich ethics case for more than two years, DeLay's speech provided the only spark of yesterday's debate. With Gingrich willing to accept the punishment, the outcome was never in doubt.





Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.


1 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:16:21 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by fightinJAG

To: fightinJAG
For those who don’t know, Republicans strongly supported action against Gingrich by the House Ethics Committee.
2 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:18:24 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)

To: fightinJAG
And for others who don’t know, Gingrich committed no crime or rules violation.
3 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:22:48 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by jimfree (In Nov 2012 Herman Cain will have more relevant and quality executive experience than Barack Obama)

To: fightinJAG
Jan.22, 1997Old news...yawn... 
4 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:24:42 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by moovova (Report my sarcastic, fear-mongering, hate-filled lies to www.AttackWatch.com by clicking HERE.)

To: fightinJAG
Many House Republicans said they had trouble reconciling their leaders' characterization of Gingrich's rules violations as tantamount to a jaywalking ticket and the magnitude of the penalty. "That argument loses its steam [when] you talk about $300,000," said Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.).Rep. Mark Sanford (R-S.C.) said that had he known what was in the ethics committee's report, he would not have voted for Gingrich as speaker. "The gray got grayer when you read the report," he said. "When I think of my three boys and what kind of example I want to set for them for leadership in this country, gray is not the example." 
5 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:25:08 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)

To: jimfree
Anyone who think Gingrich is going to get the Republican caucus unified under his leadership is dreaming.
He is still hated and mistrusted by many who have personal experience working with him.
That number will grow as more in the party try to work with him if he’s elected.
6 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:26:54 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)

To: fightinJAG
Newt is NOT for today. Not now.
7 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:28:22 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)

To: fightinJAG
Gingrich aligned himself with Ronald Reagan. In congress, led the Republican Revolution taking the Republican majority for the first time in 40 years. As Speaker passed the Contract with America, cut taxes, decreased the deficit, balanced the federal budget, blocked HillaryCare, reformed welfare, fought Clinton tooth and nail. A determined aggressive man with these ambitions and accomplishments makes many political enemies along the way. Someones ox always gets gored. Toes get stepped on. Partisan bickering, sniping and ethics charges break out. Nothing came of any of it.
8 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:30:20 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is brewing!! Impeach the corrupt Marxist bastard!!)

To: fightinJAG
At least Newt did support Ronald Reagan and the Reagan Revolution. He did build a successful Republican majority. He did cut taxes, did reduce the deficit, did balance the budget, did block HillaryCare, did reform welfare, did allow us to reap the whirlwind of the Reagan economy.Romney saddled Massachusetts with budget busting RomneyCare, taxpayer funded "safe and legal" abortion, gay marriage, leftist judges and a completely destroyed Republican label. And RomneyCare did become the model and impetus for ObamaCare.
Not to mention the fact that Newt has the support of the Republican conservative base and the grassroots tea party supporters:

Romney has the support of the establishment elite and shares the moderate/liberal RINO vote:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/151355/Gingrich-Romney-Among-GOP-Voters-Nationwide.aspx
Who you gonna call? 
9 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:32:45 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is brewing!! Impeach the corrupt Marxist bastard!!)

To: BunnySlippers
I can’t believe this is even happening. This is McCain 2008 or Dole 1996 all over again. Going up against Newt, I can’t wait to see the MSM fawning over Obama as the family values candidate.
10 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:33:56 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Hoodat (Because they do not change, Therefore they do not fear God. -Psalm 55:19-)

To: jimfree
And for others who don’t know, Gingrich committed no crime or rules violation.Yeah, sure he didn't. That's why he resigned. 
11 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:35:19 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Hoodat (Because they do not change, Therefore they do not fear God. -Psalm 55:19-)

To: fightinJAG
Holy crap, what a bunch of small potatoes. Hell, Obama got half his cash last time from overseas. They went after Newt hard with 85 alleged violations and 84 were bullshit and 1 led to a reprimand. Hell, clinton was censured and the Dems would him back in in a heartbeat. You’re bailing out a rowboat with a dixie cup, my FRiend.
12 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:37:56 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by ez ("Abashed the Devil stood and felt how awful goodness is." - Milton, "Paradise Lost")

To: fightinJAG
For those who don’t know politicians are sanctioned crooks. The trick is to find the one with more integrity than the other one. We know what they are and accept it, to some extent. This has always been the case. If you consider this example some litmus case on Gingrich then you’re naive. The msm lays on conservatives and covers for liberals. This article reads like the absurd. And the actual issue was absurd. Hard to believe you were a JAG.
13 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:38:04 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by TwoSwords

To: fightinJAG
“Rep. Mark Sanford (R-S.C.) said that had he known what was in the ethics committee’s report, he would not have voted for Gingrich as speaker. “The gray got grayer when you read the report,” he said. “When I think of my three boys and what kind of example I want to set for them for leadership in this country, gray is not the example.”
Wow, is that the pot calling the kettle black or not. The recently discredited governor with his South American lover. I’m sure if the SC voters would have known he was a philanderer, they wouldn’t have voted for him as governor. Unfortunately all of the idiots are not in the DimCrap party.
However, don’t misinterpret this as a defense of Newt, who may well be ne(u)wtered before all this race is over.
14 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:38:25 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by secondamendmentkid

To: Hoodat
Well, I;m hoping we get behind Perry.
I know this doesn’t t help. Or mebbe it does ...
15 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:39:23 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by BunnySlippers (I LOVE BULL MARKETS . . .)

To: fightinJAG; All
For those who don’t know, Newt exposed House Speaker Jim Wright (D) and Wright was forced out:
In 1988 Wright became the target of an inquiry by the House Ethics Committee. Their report in early 1989 implied that he had used bulk purchases of his book, ‘Reflections of a Public Man’, to earn speaking fees in excess of the allowed maximum, and that his wife, Betty, was given a job and perks to avoid the limit on gifts.
Faced with an increasing loss of effectiveness, Wright tendered his resignation as Speaker on May 31, 1989, the resignation to become effective on the selection of a successor. He was the first Speaker to resign because of a scandal.
Democrats had held for 40 years (1954). When Newt became Speaker (1994) the Democrats wanted revenge and they got it.
We are all guilty of breaking some federal regulation - it’s just a matter of who wants to enforce it and why.
16 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:40:06 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by donna (This is what happens when America is no longer a Christian nation.)

To: donna
Call this Gingrich’s Revenge.
17 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:43:24 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by HiTech RedNeck (Sometimes progressives find their scripture in the penumbra of sacred bathroom stall writings (Tzar))

To: Hoodat
THE IRS FOUND HIM TO BE INNOCENT OF THE CHARGES AGAINST HIM ... HE VIOLATED NO LAWS!!!! If you’re going to pontificate, at least get your facts straight!
18 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:43:47 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by KalaSamy

To: fightinJAG
Rep. Mark Sanford (R-S.C.) said..."When I think of my three boys and what kind of example I want to set..."Oh look! There's ex-Rep Sanford now on a beach in Argentina, with his mistress! Let's ask him what shade of gray he prefers..."
 
19 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:44:24 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by moovova (Report my sarcastic, fear-mongering, hate-filled lies to www.AttackWatch.com by clicking HERE.)

To: fightinJAG
Curiously you didn’t mention the other 84 bogus charges that were filed against Newt & subsequently dropped. He was Palinized before there was such a term. You also failed to mention the IRS cleared him of all charges after his departure.
The dems have been famous for these tactics for years. Have you denounced these tactics........except for ONE instance against Newt? They were wrong all the other times against Newt & MANY others except this once? Do you really not see the pattern?
And what was his unpardonable crime? Teaching a course? C’mon dude.
20 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:45:58 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Confab

To: fightinJAG
Are you a Ron Paul nutter spreading that crazy “ Blame America for 9-11 “crazy man's Newt Smears here ?? 
21 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:49:52 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by ncalburt (NO MORE WIMPS need to apply to fight the Soros Funded Puppet !)

To: KalaSamy
THE IRS FOUND HIM TO BE INNOCENT OF THE CHARGES AGAINST HIM ... HE VIOLATED NO LAWS!!!! If you’re going to pontificate, at least get your facts straight!Moving the goal posts, are we? Who said anything about the IRS. But then people who are completely innocent of all charges typically make a habit out of paying $300,000 fines and resigning their posts. Next, you will be telling me that Bill Clinton was innocent because the IRS said so. (In all-caps, of course) 
22 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:50:58 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Hoodat (Because they do not change, Therefore they do not fear God. -Psalm 55:19-)

To: fightinJAG
It was a disgrace what was done to Gingrich. I remember it well and I was ashamed how the Republicans attacked one of their own for doing nothing more than helping the conservative cause. History repeats itself.
23 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:51:14 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by vbmoneyspender

To: fightinJAG
So the Mitt Romney Alinsky tactics begin...

For those who don’t know, Republicans strongly supported action against Gingrich by the House Ethics Committee.

For those who don't know, Republicans folded like weenies, and that's how it happened every Republican since has been trashed.
24 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:53:40 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)

To: Hoodat
” Who said anything about the IRS”
The specific charges were that Newt had broken IRS laws. The fact that the IRS found Newt innocent shows how bogus the charges were especially in conjunction w/ all the other previous bogus charges.
Did you agree w/ what the dems did to Palin? Were all those legit too?
25 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:56:26 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Confab

To: moovova
!Ella no esta culpable!
26 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:56:47 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)

To: Confab
Did you agree w/ what the dems did to Palin? Were all those legit too?I missed the part where Palin paid a $300,000 fine. 
27 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:57:54 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Hoodat (Because they do not change, Therefore they do not fear God. -Psalm 55:19-)

To: Jim Robinson
After a long deliberation, I have decided that I will not vote for Gingrich in the primaries. You know all the reasons why, so no need to detail them here.
And I see no reason to rush into Newt’s arms before one vote has even been cast for the nomination. I am not influenced by polls and charts about who else is supporting him. That makes no difference to me as there is no need to jump on a bandwagon during the primaries.
At the least, conservatives going all in for Newt now are GIVING UP WHATEVER LEVERAGE they may have had on a President Gingrich. So many who were saying months ago they would never vote for Newt, and for good and longstanding reasons, nevertheless have flown to his support like moths to a candle — imo, showing the GOP elites nothing but a streak of desperation and impatience.
And showing Newt that he can do and say just about anything, now and in the past and, therefore, in the future, and apparently desperate conservatives will support him anyway. Some of them will give it all up just for the very short-term and ultimately politically meaningless thrill of — maybe — seeing Gingrich debate Obama.
Gingrich is treating conservatives like they’re stupid. He spends 20 years flakking for the individual mandate in healthcare, when it becomes a problem, he says oh, don’t worry, I’m not for that. And, off everyone goes, big smiles on their faces, singing Zippety-do=dah! And Gingrich must be saying to himself, GOD, THIS IS EASY.
Jim, you know this man is a phoney. And we are going to run fullspeed to latch on to him before the voting has even started rather than **at least giving him a run for his money and making him work to win the nomination** — thereby at least trying to send him the message that we don’t lap up his Barbara Streisand and he better understand our demands and understand them well.
No, the way things are going now, Gingrich must be saying to himself, “I thought I’d have trouble with those pesky conservatives trying to hold my feet to the fire on all my liberal crap over the years, but, GOD, THEY ARE EASY.”
Have you noticed that before Gingrich was the frontrunner, we were spending our time hotly debating MASSIVE TAX REFORM and GOVERNMENT SPENDING CUTS?
After, all the movement has talked about is Newt. And that’s how it’s always been with Newt: he always manages to make it all about him.
I for one am going to keep on him and try to raise the voice that lets him know he’s not doing a cakewalk with at least some conservatives.
If we end up with a President Gingrich (and I will vote for the GOP nominee), at this rate conservatives are doing nothing but MARGINALIZING themselves as an influence on him and his administration. If he’s going to win, it would actually be better for him to squeak through and know very well where his bread his buttered.
He is NOT principled, but he can be managed somewhat if he knows he must earn and earn our votes (conservatives) every day.
28 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:58:43 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)

To: Hoodat
Only reason there was a fine, was because the GOP was WEENIES.
Grow a pair, GOP.
Stop attacking our own. Democrats are the opposition.
29 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 20:59:25 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)

To: Hoodat
The IRS cleared the organizations involved and by implication cleared Gingrich. It was pure and complete politics that Newt took a way out of.
30 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:00:05 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by jimfree (In Nov 2012 Herman Cain will have more relevant and quality executive experience than Barack Obama)

To: Hoodat
I missed the part where Palin paid a $300,000 fine.She avoided that potential outcome by resigning. Do you know what Newt was fined for? And does it even matter to you? 
31 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:00:13 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by vbmoneyspender

To: secondamendmentkid
Yes, the point was that at the time the Republicans were the ones strongly behind getting Gingrich out. In fact, that’s why he resigned later. His own party couldn’t stand him.
Those who think Gingrich is going to go to Washington and do all these marvelous things must think his reputation within the party is all fixed now and he has become an inspiring, unifying leader rather than the trainwreck he became as Speaker.
32 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:02:30 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)

To: Cringing Negativism Network
Embarrassing isn’t it? The dems bought into this despicable tactic, & apparently so did a few republicans.
Look at how conservative the republicans became after Newt’s departure! /sarc
33 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:02:52 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Confab

To: donna
***** “We are all guilty of breaking some federal regulation - it’s just a matter of who wants to enforce it and why.” *****
Ii probably broke 20 - 30 Laws in my sleep last night, a dozen more while making Coffee this morning and an uncountable # during my day ... the Vast Majority of which go unnoticed ... unless I am driving and then a well armed “Revenue Enhancement Agent” will point them out and charge me accordingly ... in the end ... Enforcement is all about power and the ability to control other people. Most Laws were passed to protect ... many are not, these days it is all about Money (FOR GOVT) and those are the Laws that are enforced.
I can no longer recognize the Country that I was born in ... Freedom may as well be a foreign word or idea, Justice is no longer Blind, it is a Select Fire weapon or a WMD... depending on the Power that wields it.
TT
34 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:03:32 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by TexasTransplant (Radical islam is real islam. Moderate islam is the trojan horse.)

To: fightinJAG
You mis-spelled “his own party were spineless twerps”.
35 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:03:36 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)

To: TwoSwords
I don’t care who you are, that’s funny!
Good grief, do you have no clue what it means when someone posts an article?
Do you think I wrote this piece or endorse each word in it?
That’s just weird.
36 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:04:21 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)

To: donna
What’s your take on the fact that it was members of Gingrich’s own party that were the strongest proponents of punishing him for his ethics violations and who later all but demanded he resign?
37 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:06:12 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)

To: Hoodat
You apparently missed the part where she paid 100’s of thousands of dollars fighting the charges. Part of the reason she gave for leaving office was to stop the blood letting in court.
It’s a pay me now or pay me latter deal. Newt felt betrayed by his own & simply decided to move on. It’s really not that hard to comprehend.
38 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:06:31 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Confab

To: fightinJAG
At some point you decided to post this article.
Own it.
So who do you support please?
39 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:06:43 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)

To: KalaSamy
This isn’t just about violating laws.
40 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:09:27 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)

(own it. Or refute it)
Clearly there’s some reason you decided this article was important to post.
What was that reason?
41 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:10:18 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)

To: fightinJAG
For those who don’t know, Republicans strongly supported action against Gingrich by the House Ethics Committee.



This sentence seemed to indicate your support for the article. I apoligize, with reservations. What would make one think you weren’t supporting the article?
42 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:10:45 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by TwoSwords

To: fightinJAG
Tell me, did the party become more, or way less conservative after Newt’s departure? Newt delivered a republican congress for the first time in forty years. Many of the same republicans that kicked him to the curb delivered the congress & the presidency to the dems just years later. Who has the better track record? Newt, or the ones that kicked him out?
43 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:12:13 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Confab

To: Confab; vbmoneyspender; jimfree; Cringing Negativism Network
From the article:Exactly one month before yesterday's vote, Gingrich admitted that he brought discredit to the House and broke its rules by failing to ensure that financing for two projects would not violate federal tax law and by giving the House ethics committee false information. 
44 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:13:43 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Hoodat (Because they do not change, Therefore they do not fear God. -Psalm 55:19-)

To: Hoodat
Speaking of Bob Dole, Gingrich borrowed the money to pay off his ethics charge fine from, yes, Bob Dole.
First, he borrowed the entire $300,000 from Bob Dole. Then, when that became an embarrassment, he said he would only use $150,000 on loan from Dole. When that became an embarrassment, Gingrich finally said he would use his own money.
Dole and Gingrich must have been tight.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/govt/leadership/ethics.htm
45 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:14:03 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)

To: ncalburt
Check my posting history for yourself.
46 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:15:35 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by fightinJAG (NO REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION! Everyone should pay taxes, everyone should pay the same rate.)

To: fightinJAG
What’s your take on the fact that it was members of Gingrich’s own party that were the strongest proponents of punishing him for his ethics violations . . .What's your basis for that statement. I remember what happened and that's not true. Rather than fight the issue, the Republicans cut a deal like they usually do.
Here's the history on the ethics charge. The Democrats contended that Newt's 'Renewing American Civilization' college course had a political purpose rather than a educational purpose. Thus, the Democrats charged that the tax-exempt status of Newt's organization, which was responsible for the college course, was violated. This was payback for the legitimate charges Newt had brought against Speaker Wright and which had resulted in his resignation.
Put simply, the ethics charge against Gingrich was bullshit then and it's a bullshit charge now. And you should be man enough to acknowledge that fact. 
47 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:17:08 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by vbmoneyspender

To: Confab
Spot. On.
Gingrich was the one, the left perfected the politics of personal destruction upon.
Gingrich was the one, the GOP perfected ... running in abject terror away from, precisely when he (and America) needed them most, upon.
Gingrich is the moment, RINO’s happened.
Weeniehood is not a winning strategy.
48 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:17:20 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)

To: Confab; vbmoneyspender; jimfree; Cringing Negativism Network
Gingrich Admits He Broke Rules and Misled PanelWASHINGTON — After two years of vehemently denying wrongdoing, House Speaker Newt Gingrich made an about-face Saturday and admitted that he had violated House rules in connection with several tax-exempt charitable organizations and had also provided "inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable" information to the Ethics Committee.

Gingrich's admission of wrongdoing in a case he had once dismissed as a "fishing expedition" came after the ethics panel's investigative subcommittee criticized the powerful speaker for improperly using the charitable organizations for partisan ends and not leveling with the committee in responses to its inquiries.
 
49 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:17:33 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Hoodat (Because they do not change, Therefore they do not fear God. -Psalm 55:19-)

To: Hoodat
Who. Do. You. Support?
Say it.
50 posted on Wed Dec 07 2011 21:18:32 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Cringing Negativism Network ("FREE TRADERS": Self-loathing Americans)


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson

No comments: