Posted on 02/15/2012 5:19:01 PM PST by writer33
WASHINGTON — Republican presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich on Wednesday declined to ask the Justice Department to release thousands of records from the House Ethics Committee’s investigation into his conduct as speaker in the 1990s.
Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond likened the request from the open-government group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington to “wild goose chases.”
The organization asked the Justice Department to release documents forwarded from the House in 1997 after it investigated Gingrich’s use of tax-exempt organizations for political gain.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Information on Gingrich and Santorum are already out in open.
CREW should ask for Obama’s records.
Wasn’t he exonerated from all those charges?..why not disclose those documents instead?
Good point. We all know what happened back then. There is enough info for everyone to make an informed decision. The request for the records is nothing more than Rat muck racking.
Everyone who lives in DC., knows that is a place to pay
back political enemies. Explains why the rinos are rinos.
Even, Lindsey from SC., said it was political pay back. (same old stuff, to stop Newt)
“CREW should ask for Obama’s records.”
Now THAT would be a unique and news worthy approach!
Quite a hit piece by AP and printed by the leftist rag WaPo which you posted. That’s also quite a photo of Newt WaPo posted.
>>>CREW should ask for Obama’s records.”
Amen. ( Post of the day )
And even though exonerated...the MSM would turn accusations into fact.
Very sad.
“I don’t blame Newt, it’s a witch hunt from the past.”
That is exactly what it was and is. A dimoKKKRAT witch hunt at the time to try and get rid of Newt.
the pictures they use, show a grumpy old person. They are
so transparent. I have never seen Newt (or anyone other than Helen Thomas) frown that way.
[ Information on Gingrich and Santorum are already out in open.
CREW should ask for Obama’s records. ]
Correction, NEWT should release ALL of his own college records and then Mock Obama mercilessly for NOT releasing his college records.
But if he did that the choir boys in the MSM would probably call him a “racist”, even though it is a “I have shown mine so show yours”
I can’t wait until Breitbart, (assuming he is not bluffing) releases the “dirt” he has in video form on College day obummer.
I think you answered your own question: He's been exonerated. He wasn't and isn't guilty. It was all a smear and a ruse put on by Newt's enemies in both political parties. An innocent person should not have to provide additional facts to justify their innocence over and over.
How would you feel if someone had trashed your reputation that way; then you were ultimately exonerated; and, then, some group of malcontent busybodies wants to go on a “fishing trip” thru your private files??? (The official findings that were released are still in the public domain.)
I would tell these minor league Inquisitors exactly where they could go w/their “request”!!!
I am just amazed at how many of my friends and acquaintances do not know he was exonerated...they don’t know what the charges were or why they were levied in the first place and by whom...all they hear is the MSM talking about ethics charges..and assume he is guilty of doing something wrong.
That’s baloney.
The 1280 pages of the inquiry are posted on the internet for years, anyone can consult and/or download them.
Google is your friend.
The big lie; repeated over and over ...a sad commentary on human nature.
It was the democrat Reps’ cabal to bring the Speaker of the House down. The charges were found “baseless” and dropped. Speaker Gingrich was completely vindicated.
January, 1999, CNN Report On Newt Gingrich’s Exoneration By The IRS Over Ethics Charges
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMpBBRUCMd8
Washington Post: Ethics Committee Drops Last of 84 Charges Against Gingrich
By Curt Anderson
Associated Press
Sunday, October 11, 1998; Page A13
The House ethics committee dropped the three remaining ethics charges against Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) yesterday, despite finding that Gingrich repeatedly violated one rule by using a political consultant to develop the Republican legislative agenda.
The ethics panel decided to take no further action because there is no evidence that “Rule 45” violations are continuing in the speaker’s office, a post Gingrich has held since 1995. Consultant Jeffrey Eisenach’s work took place while Gingrich was the GOP minority whip in 1990-91.
In a brief interview, Gingrich said he felt a “big sense of relief” now that the four-year investigation is over.
“It ends a chapter. Let’s go on to other things,” he said.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/govt/leadership/stories/101198.htm
Not to worry.
If he does happen to get the nomination, Nancy will make sure they get ‘leaked’ to the press.
The vague accusations of “ethics charges” are what Romney killed Newt with in Florida. I don’t think Newt’s done a good job explaining what really went on here. When someone says you “resigned in disgrace” and you don’t clear up that misconception you’re not going to win an election. Newt should have had a full press conference to go over all the details of what happened in the ethics investigation. It’s a more serious PR problem than he seems to realize. He has this on his web site at least...
http://www.newt.org/answers#Ethics
Ethics Investigation
In 1999, after a 3 ½ year investigation, the Internal Revenue Service (under President Bill Clinton) concluded that Gingrich did not violate any tax laws, leading renowned CNN Investigative Reporter Brooks Jackson to remark on air “it turns out [Gingrich] was right and those who accused him of tax fraud were wrong.”
Eighty four politically motivated ethics charges were filed against Newt when he was Speaker of the House regarding the use of tax exempt funds for a college course he taught titled “Renewing American Civilization.” Eighty-three of the eighty-four charges were found to be without merit and dropped. The remaining charge had to do with contradictory documents prepared by Newt’s lawyer supplied during the course of the investigation. Newt took responsibility for the error and agreed to reimburse the committee the cost of the investigation into that discrepancy. In 1999, after a 3 ½ year investigation, the Internal Revenue Service (under President Bill Clinton, nonetheless) concluded that Gingrich did not violate any tax laws, leading renowned CNN Investigative Reporter Brooks Jackson to remark on air “it turns out [Gingrich] was right and those who accused him of tax fraud were wrong.”
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.