Skip to comments.CREW Calls On Gingrich To Tell DOJ To Release Investigation Records
Posted on 02/15/2012 12:41:37 PM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
The watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) called on Newt Gingrich to tell the Justice Department to release its records of the House Ethics Committee's investigaiton of his conduct. From a news release:
"The committee inquiry centered on Mr. Gingrichs use of tax-exempt organizations for political purposes and he was ultimately sanctioned for making false statements to Congress. The ethics committee forwarded its files to DOJ and the IRS for further action in 1997.
Last month, CREW sent Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to both federal agencies requesting the records. This week, DOJ denied CREWs request, citing Mr. Gingrichs need for privacy and claiming the records could be released only with his written permission.
As a candidate for president, Mr. Gingrichs congressional record should be an open book, said CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan. The records of the ethics inquiry could shed substantial light on Mr. Gingrichs conduct while in the House. Americans should have the opportunity to evaluate that information in considering Mr. Gingrichs candidacy.
Newt Gingrich was absolved by the IRS of any wrong doing. No one would sign off on opening up raw files.
If you want to know the facts before commenting, read this column by Byron York:
Byron York: What really happened in the Gingrich ethics case? .Back in January 1997, the day after Cole presented his damning report to the Ethics Committee, the Washington Post's front-page banner headline was "Gingrich Actions 'Intentional' or 'Reckless'; Counsel Concludes That Speaker's Course Funding Was 'Clear Violation' of Tax Laws." That same day, the New York Times ran eleven stories on the Gingrich matter, four of them on the front page (one inside story was headlined, "Report Describes How Gingrich Used Taxpayers' Money for Partisan Politics"). On television, Dan Rather began the CBS Evening News by telling viewers that "only now is the evidence of Newt Gingrich's ethics violations and tax problems being disclosed in detail."
The story was much different when Gingrich was exonerated. The Washington Post ran a brief story on page five. The Times ran an equally brief story on page 23. And the evening newscasts of CBS, NBC, and ABC -- which together had devoted hours of coverage to the question of Gingrich's ethics -- did not report the story at all. Not a word.
Gingrich himself, not wanting to dredge up the whole ugly tale, said little about his exoneration. "I consider this a full and complete vindication," he wrote in a brief statement. "I urge my colleagues to go back and read their statements and watch how they said them, with no facts, based on nothing more than a desire to politically destroy a colleague."....
Now, Gingrich is saying much the same thing in the face of Romney's accusations. And despite the prominence of the matter in the GOP race, few outsiders seem inclined to dive back into the ethics matter to determine whether Gingrich deserves the criticism or not. But if Gingrich is to have any hope of climbing out from under the allegations, he'll have to find some way of letting people know what really happened.
The "history lesson?" It is the January 21, 1997 lead-in tease by Tom Brokaw for ABC News about Newt Gingrich, as only ABC News can do.
The "lesson" learned is that Romney will do anything to win.
What a bunch of crap.
It would be more fitting if he tells DOJ to release ALL of the usurper and illegal criminal alien in the Whit- Hut to release HIS records, hmmm!!!
CREW is the same outfit that has deemed Rick Santorum one of the most corrupt Senators in 2005-2006.
All I can say is “SCREW CREW.”
Mark Levin educates Chris Christie, Romney on Gingrich ‘ethics violations’
September 2006 - CREWs Most Corrupt Members of Congress:Members of the Senate: ■Conrad Burns (R-MT) ■Bill Frist (R-TN) ■Rick Santorum (R-PA)Members of the House:■Alan Mollohan (D-WV) ■Roy Blunt (R-MO) ■Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) ■Ken Calvert (R-CA) ■Richard Pombo (R-CA) ■John Doolittle (R-CA) ■Rick Renzi (R-AZ) ■Tom Feeney (R-FL) ■Pete Sessions (R-TX) ■Katherine Harris (R-FL) ■John Sweeney (R-NY) ■William Jefferson (D-LA) ■Charles Taylor (R-NC) ■Jerry Lewis (R-CA) ■Maxine Waters (D-CA) ■Gary Miller (R-CA) ■Curt Weldon (R-PA)
WHY doesn’t this blow hard NOT educate people on the the real issue, the CONSTITUTION’s requirement of a NBC???
Just a simple question, - not a bunch of sh$t!, - have YOU pledge an Oath to the CONSTITUTION, or have any of your “friends” done likewise, huh???
[July 2006] A New Alliance Of Democrats Spreads Funding
.To become a “partner,” requires a $25,000 entry fee and annual dues of $30,000 to cover alliance operations as well as some of its contributions to start-up liberal groups. Beyond this, partners also agree to spend at least $200,000 annually on organizations that have been endorsed by the alliance
This accreditation process is the root of Democracy Alliance’s influence. If a group does not receive the alliance’s blessing, dozens of the nation’s wealthiest political contributors as a practical matter become off-limits for fundraising purposes.
Many of these contributors give away far more than the $200,000 requirement. Soros, Gill and insurance magnate Peter Lewis are among the biggest contributors, but 45 percent of the 95 partners gave $300,000 or better
Democracy Alliance organizers say they are trying to bring principles of accountability and capital investment that are common in business to the world of political advocacy, where they believe such principles have often been missing.
Wade declined to discuss the donors or the groups they fund. But, she described how the groups were chosen.
Alliance officials initially reviewed about 600 liberal and Democratic-leaning organizations. Then, about 40 of those groups were invited to apply for an endorsement — with a requirement that they submit detailed business plans and internal financial information. Those groups were then screened by a panel of alliance staff members, donors and outside experts, including some with expertise in philanthropy rather than politics. So far, according to people familiar with the alliance, 25 groups have received its blessing.
The goal was to invest in groups that could be influential in building what activists call “political infrastructure” — institutions that can support Democratic causes not simply in the next election but for years to come.
Likewise, a Democracy Alliance blessing effectively jump-started Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).
Would you mind cite how THAT oath is worded???
“I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”
That does include Article II. Section 1. Clause 5???
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.