Replies

The inaccurate information was an innocuous mistake on a legal form filed by an attorney that Newt signed without bothering to verify. It was legal silage that became haute cuisine for the sharks once there was blood in the water.

There was no criminal intent.

There was no coverup.

It was a classic technicality.

That's why (one day after his 11th re-election from his Georgia district) he said:
I'm willing to lead but I'm not willing to preside over people who are cannibals. My only fear would be that if I tried to stay, it would just overshadow whoever my successor is.

The inaccurate information was an innocuous mistake on a legal form filed by an attorney that Newt signed without bothering to verify.

I'm sure you are capable of doing a little research instead of parroting Gingrich campaign points.

Gingrich gave two letters to the ethics committee, dated Dec. 8, 1994, and March 27, 1995, respectively, denying GOPAC was connected with his college teaching. That was untrue and that is why he was censured and fined.

There must be blood squirting from your ears at the speed you are spinning. Why don't you just accept the fact that Gingrich screwed up and was reprimanded for it and move on? I never even brought up Gingrich's ethics problems in my posts. Do you think this is a positive for him? With friends like you...