House Reprimands, Penalizes Speaker (Flashback)

WaPo ^ | Jan.22, 1997 | John E. Yang

[fightinJAG]

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.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

(own it. Or refute it)

Clearly there’s some reason you decided this article was important to post.

What was that reason?

[TwoSwords]

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?

[Confab]

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?

[Hoodat]

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.

[fightinJAG]

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

[fightinJAG]

Check my posting history for yourself.

[vbmoneyspender]

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.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

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.

[Hoodat]

Gingrich Admits He Broke Rules and Misled Panel

WASHINGTON — 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.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

Who. Do. You. Support?

Say it.

[fightinJAG]

C’mon dude, those other charges were dropped when Newt copped a plea and agreed to pay $300,000 (which, curiously, he initially borrowed from Bob Dole, of all people).

The point is that Newt Gingrich ultimately lost the support of his entire caucus, for MANY reasons.

That is not consistent with the myth being spun around here of his vaunted leadership.

[Confab]

You mean, he was FORCED to admit........? Grasping man.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

IMHO you are parrroting the DNC talking points from the time.

Clinton talking points.

[jimfree]

You’re bloody good Hoodat. But you don’t speak to the IRS finding. That is bloody dishonest.

[vbmoneyspender]

Were you following politics when this happened? The charge was that Newt's college course Renewing American Civilization had a political purpose rather than an educational purpose and that, as a result, the tax exempt status of the organization that had put on the course had been violated. The IRS subsequently found that charge not be true - which meant there was not basis to the original ethics charge that he paid $300,000 on.

In a court of law, the IRS's decision would have resulted in a reversal of the ethics charge - but Congress is more often than not above the law.

[Hoodat]

Right now, I support Rick Santorum. I don’t let the polls pick my candidate for me.

[Cringing Negativism Network]

James Carville talking points.

[Texan]

And for others who don’t know, Gingrich committed no crime or rules violation.

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."

So did he admit wrong doing and lying about it or didn't he?

[Cringing Negativism Network]

I was for Gingrich before the GOP weenies abandoned him the first time around.

I don’t let polls pick my candidate either.

[fightinJAG]

At the time it happened, I agreed with you. Now having more than a decade to see how Newt has conducted himself, I think a lot more of this incident and his resulting resignation was because of how Newt, as Speaker, had completely alienated so many of his fellow Republicans.

Some may think that’s a positive trait.

But I don’t see it really working well if Newt becomes President.