Skip to comments.ABC interviewed Gingrich ex-wife (She could "end his career")
Posted on 01/19/2012 6:52:01 AM PST by Responsibility2ndEdited on 01/19/2012 7:00:13 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
NEW YORK (AP) - An ABC News executive tells The Associated Press that the network has interviewed Newt Gingrich's second wife and is likely to air the segment Thursday on "Nightline."
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Cannot agree with your final sentence.
The Mitt Romney persona is a construction, just like O’s. Dig a little deeper; his immorality (arrogance, pride, lies glibly, not really a devout Morman no matter how much money he gives the LDS groups) is dressed up prettier than Newt’s obvious sins of the flesh but Romney’s fallen-human traits are still plainly visible to a discerning eye.
Gingrich foretold that this sort of publicity (ex-wife rants) was coming and now it’s here.
It WAS about the BJ’s.
This is where the character issues first come into play. Because Clinton was a horn dog - he naturally lied under oath.
We conservatives used to say (about Clinton) that if we can’t trust a man to remain faithful to his wife, then how can we trust him on other fundamental issues?
Now that Newt is our “only option”; we seem to forget about the moral issues.
Gingrich/Perry 2012 ......
Go Newt !
Remember - it ain’t treason when a Dem does it...it’s just “trade” with a like-minded partner.
Slick Willie should be in an orange jumpsuit sharing a cell as Billybob’s Love Sponge.
It’s called “lack of balls”, and that’s the reason he’s still free.
You statement is a demonstration of your willful ignorance.
Clinton was Impeached for lying to a Federal Grand Jury investigating charges of sexual harassment.
He was not impeached for screwing women while married.
As far as I know Newt has never even testified before a Federal Grand Jury.
Did you moral zeal blind you to the facts?
I can’t argue the fact that neither Romney or Gingrich is WAY less than acceptable.
And we all know how this scenario worked out for us in 2008.
Newt never attacked Clinton for personal sins. The impeachment was about lying under oath and Gingrich always made his impeachment arguments based on that.
It is up to all e-mail/Twitter/Facebook warriors to remind America about Obama’s bisexual cocaine binges with his friend Larry Sinclair.
Time to fight fire with fire on every message board you encounter!
Not saying that Mitt doesn’t have moral issues. He does.
But if I look at your example (and over analyze it) and weigh thievery against banging your intern for years and years while still married....
Then guess who loses in the ‘morality matters’ contest?
I’ve seen posters say that if one asks for forgiveness, then it’s between the sinner and God. (another interesting point—Gingrich can say he has changed, yet Romney saying he’s changed his view on abortion is not to be believed. I guess only God knows what is in their hearts. Ah, the mental gymnastics....) I don’t remember Clinton asking for forgiveness, at least not before the appearance of the blue dress and he knew he was caught. The legalities of the actual impeachment were about the lying under oath.
She has a high opinion of herself....bitter vindictive nasty X wives are a dime a dozen. and I don’t care about her martial problems...thats her problem....is anybody really interested in listening to her...not me for one....
Hale! How do!
“Remember - it aint treason when a Dem does it...its just trade with a like-minded partner.”
Yup. And JPL is “open for business” again here recently, after W had shut the leaks down.
I screwed up...she said HE wanted to be a swinger.
Who knows if he even said something about this or not...doesn’t sound like he did it. However, similar claims brought down Jack Ryan and gave us Obama.
Some more snippets about your boy Newt:
“Newt Gingrich is smarter than you. Don’t feel bad, he’s smarter than everybody else, too. Just ask him. Or look at what he’s done.
Repeated adultery with younger women, while each successive wife was seriously ill -— and all along Newt was proclaiming himself a champion of family values. Attacking mortgage lender Fannie Mae, while secretly getting paid $1.6 million as a lobbyist for them and claiming he was a “historian,” not a lobbyist. Attacking Congress for gridlock, when personally led the destruction of Congress’ civility and traditions in the 1980s as a “bomb-thrower” and evil genius tactician. (Seriously, look it up.) A half-million charge account at Tiffany’s Jewelers for his latest, youngest woman (that we know of).
All this for 30 years running, and he’s still a leading contender for President as a religious, morally crusading Republican? Yeah, he’s smarter alright. As a historian, he knows Americans forget anything over 5 years old, and the press will ignore your long-term character traits if you give them any new, shiny story to report.
It’s not that Newt lacks charm. My personal favorite thing is that he loves, loves, LOVES dinosaurs! Not in any creepy way, for once, but with the deep enthusiasm of a five-year-old boy. For that matter, notice how many of his “visionary” scientific ideas involve lasers and outer space and huge explosions. That’s adorable. The problem is, most five year olds have a sincere narcissism that would lead them to happily order far-off cities destroyed if they got some candy in return. That’s why we don’t put them in charge of the world.
But ultimately, Gingrich is amazingly similar to Bill Clinton - two are pot smoking, draft-dodging adulterers from poor Southern families. Click on the allegation of your choice:
Callista Bisek. Anne Manning. The unnamed “young volunteer”. Are we missing anyone?
Family Values? Pressing Wife for Divorce in the Hospital
House Banking Scandal: Newt Bounced 22 Checks
Book Deals: Murdoch’s $4.5 Million wasn’t the first
GOPAC sleaze: Taxpayer subsidies for his partisan campaign course.
Corporate reward: $2,500/month to Newt’s wife
Who Owns Him?
“We had oral sex. He prefers that modus operandi because then he can say, ‘I never slept with her.’” - Anne Manning (who was also married at the time.)
“We would have won in 1974 if we could have kept him out of the office, screwing her [a young volunteer] on the desk.” - Dot Crews, his campaign scheduler at the time
[In the book] “Men Who Hate Women and the Women Who Love Them”, [I] “found frightening pieces that related to my own life.” - Newt.
“I think you can write a psychological profile of me that says I found a way to immerse my insecurities in a cause large enough to justify whatever I wanted it to.” - Newt, speaking to Gail Sheehy.
“She isn’t young enough or pretty enough to be the President’s wife. And besides, she has cancer.” - Newt, on his first wife.
“I don’t want him to be president and I don’t think he should be.” - Newt’s wife Marianne.
She [Callista] is the single most self-centered person Ive run into in politicsits all about her. They do these movies together, and she does a word count: she has to have the same number of words on camera as he does or they have to reshoot. ...And Callista did not want him to run for President. Thats why he had to buy her so much damn jewelry. - Will Rogers, Gingrich’s Iowa strategist until he quit in May, 2011
“If the country today were to move to the left, Newt would sense it before it started happening and lead the way.” - Dot Crews, his campaign scheduler throughout the 1970s.
“It doesn’t matter what I do. People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.” - Newt.
Sex on the Desk - Oral Sex is More Easily Denied
Several newspapers are now reporting that Newt Gingrich is dating and basically living with Callista Bisek, a “willowy blond Congressional aide 23 years his junior.” Biske, 33, has been spending nights at Gingrich’s apartment near the Capitol and has her own key. In an amazing act of hypocrisy, Gingrich was apparently dating Bisek all during Clinton-Lewinsky adultery scandal, even as he proclaimed family values and bitterly criticized the President for his adultery.
Reporters and other Washington insiders have known about this relationship since 1994, even before Gingrich became Speaker of the House, but did not have any solid proof to report. In 1995, Vanity Fair magazine described Bisek as Gingrich’s “frequent breakfast companion.” Gingrich was married to Marianne Gingrich during all of that time, and just filed for divorce in August 1999.
Newt is apparently trying to create a new hybrid form, Christian adultery. According to MSNBC, Bisek sings in the National Shrine Choir, and Newt would often wait for her at the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, listening to her sing while he read the Bible.
This is hardly the first time Newt has cheated, either. “It was common knowledge that Newt was involved with other women during his [first] marriage to Jackie. Maybe not on the level of John Kennedy. But he had girlfriends — some serious, some trivial.” — Dot Crews, his campaign scheduler throughout the 70s. One woman, Anne Manning, has come forward and confirmed a relationship with him during the 1976 campaign. “We had oral sex. He prefers that modus operandi because then he can say, ‘I never slept with her.’”
Kip Carter, his former campaign treasurer, was walking Newt’s daughters back from a football game one day and cut across a driveway where he saw a car. “As I got to the car, I saw Newt in the passenger seat and one of the guys’ wives with her head in his lap going up and down. Newt kind of turned and gave me this little-boy smile. Fortunately, Jackie Sue and Kathy were a lot younger and shorter then.”
Newly recovered court files cast doubt on Gingrich version of first divorce,” By Alan Duke, CNN, December 27, 2011
Callista quote: The Good Wife: Can Callista Gingrich save her husband?, by Ariel Lev, The New Yorker, January 23, 2012
“Doesn’t matter what I do” quote: John H. Richardson, “Newt Gingrich: The Indispensable Republican,” Esquire Magazine, August 10, 2010
“Newt’s Glass House,” by Stephen Talbot, Salon.com, August 28, 1998
“Newt Plays House With New Squeeze,” by Timothy Burger and Owen Moritz, NY Daily News, August 12, 1999
“Newt’s Fooling Around With His Girl On the Hill,” by Andy Soltis, New York Post, August 12, 1999
“The Big One That Got Away,” by David Corn, Salon Website, August 12, 1998
adulterous choir practice: “Personals”, by Leah Garchik, San Francisco Chronicle, August 17, 1999 pE12
“Gingrich Won’t Answer Woman’s Adultery Story,” Missoula (Montana) Missoulian, August 16, 1995page 1
“Tales About Gingrich make field level”, Idaho Spokesman Review, August 16, 1995 pB6
“Gingrich Aided Export Firm That Employed His Wife”, NY Times News Service, San Francisco Chronicle, February 7, 1995 pA7
“Gingrich, Critic of ‘Business as Usual,’ Helps Out Special Interests Like ‘Any Member of Congress’”, Phil Kuntz, Wall Street Journal, April 3, 1995 pA16
“Gingrich’s political education”, Jeff Gerth and Stephen Labaton (NY Times News Service), San Francisco Examiner, February 12, 1995 pA6
“IRS clears Gingrich donation that led to his House censure”, Capitol Hill Blue Website, February 4, 1999
Ethics Committee Drops Last of 84 Charges Against Gingrich ,By Curt Anderson (Associated Press), Washington Post, October 11, 1998, Page A13
“Use of Tax-Exempt Groups Integral to Political Strategy”, by Charles R. Babcock, Washington Post, January 7, 1997, Page A01
“Jump-Start: How Speaker Gingrich Grabbed Power and Attention So Quickly”, Wall Street Journal, January 19, 1995 pA1
“The Inner Quest of Newt Gingrich”, Gail Sheehy, Vanity Fair, September 1995 p147 “Gingrich, Murdoch reveal lobbyist’s role at meeting”, Katharine Seelye (NY Times News Service), San Francisco Examiner, pA1 “Murdoch, Gingrich Admit They Talked”, San Francisco Chronicle, January 13, 1995
“The Mysterious Mrs. Newt”, Martin Fletcher (London Times News Service), SF Examiner, January 15, 1995 pA4 “Newt’s Near Misses”, Ron Curran, The Bay Guardian, January 11, 1995 p10
“Newt, Inc.”, Dennis Bernstein, Bay Guardian, February 1, 1995 p19
Paid for by Real People For Real Change and not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.
Romney, thief, approves abortion, GOOD.
Gingrich, adultery. BAD!!!
LMAO!!! 2 hours?!?
He sure as hell traded up.
Are you aware those folks are commie baby killers?
“Paid for by Real People For Real Change and not authorized by any candidate or candidates committee.”
Are you aware those folks are commie baby killers”
Immaterial, the sources are from all over the place, not by this group. Look at the list of sources, and then try refuting all of them. You won’t be able to, because Newt has a long track record that has been reported about in multiple sources. So, find another excuse to exonerate your boy Newt’s long track record of bad behavior. You can’t.
That's not even true. But you'll believe it because you want to.
Is their daughter a liar?
She doesn’t care. If it’s dirt she’ll use it even if it’s from the left and incorrect.
“Setting the Record Straight - daughter Jackie Cushman
Is their daughter a liar?”
She wants her father to be President with all the perks that go along with it. She will “color” the truth to achieve that end.
You realize that such action negates any source quoted by you. I know that you don't care. Poo flingers seldom do.
Have a nice day.
But Mitts flip-flopping VIEWS on abortion is much better than Newts PRACTICE of adultery.
Newt’s adultery does’nt affect me as a citizen. As a citizen of MA however my tax payer dollars help to pay for abortions that MR FLIP FLOPPER enacted into LAW WITH ROMNEY CARE.
Aren’t you a Romney supporter?
Real People’s statement of their philosophy:
“ince 1995, we’ve been a fair, authoritative and opinionated place to find out all the scandals and character details on all major candidates for president. All of our sources are listed at the bottom of each page, including page numbers and URLs with links where possible. We rely on mainstream publications, and aren’t interested in conspiracy theories. Frankly, you don’t need them with most candidates. Consensus reality has plenty of dirt already.
Though this may sound negative, we are very optimistic. (Who is “we”? Start with the editor, Mark Saltveit. You can read more about our group here.) We think that if you put out good information on politics and present it well, people can make up their own minds and choose well. That’s why we don’t need to endorse anybody.
What’s wrong with the entertainment and news media?
Lots, most of which you are already familiar with:
- huge corporate chains that control all of TV and nearly every newspaper. Their only goal is profit, not quality news;
- the news media are deliberately forgetful. If a story has ever been reported, it’s not considered “new” and so they won’t report it. We think if a politician was convicted of corruption 10 years ago, you should know that when deciding if he or she should be president. We provide comprehensive and edited archiving and synopsis. At best, the mainstream press will sell you copies of their old articles for $2.95 each, with no context or perspective.
- the phony type of “objectivity” defined as “quote a Republican insider and a Democrat insider and make no further effort to piece together the truth.”
Real objectivity does NOT mean the reporter has no opinion. Anyone with a pulse has an opinion. The reporter’s JOB is to have an opinion, to aggressively dig up the facts, and apply his or her carefully honed opinion to sort it all out.
Politics is always murky. There are always allegations and denials, spins and flat out lies. The passive approach of “just quote each side” is very easily manipulated, and it happens every day, constantly.
Objectivity means the reporter is ultimately alone with the facts, and must make a SUBJECTIVE decision what to write. They must be independent of organized agendas and interest groups, not independent of their own judgement. Good reporters are always out on a limb, and their reputation will depend on their accuracy and fairness.
The best and fairest reporting today in America is the Wall Street Journal’s, despite its open conservative bias and ties to Republicans. (I exclude the editorial page, of course.) Despite who pays their rent, they report fairly and aggressively on their friends as well as their enemies. They print dirt on Gingrich and Alexander as well as Clinton; and though they have scrutinized every inch of the Whitewater scandal and sell books hyping it, they aren’t afraid to run news articles saying it might be overblown. Their biases are open for all to see and adjust for.
If every city in America had a newspaper that good, politics would not be a problem, and we’d be solving some of our very big problems.
Other big problems with the media:
- the absurd influence given to Washington insider pundits, and a corresponding focus on mechanics and strategies of campaigns;
- obsessive focus on polls and the “horse race” aspects of races, which has seduced most politicians into being followers, not leaders;
- jaded news coverage that requires candidates to run TV ads to get attention, which requires them to beg for money full time. Real leaders won’t put up with that, and they are refusing to run, or are retiring;
- and lack of real investigation and reporting. Among newspapers, only the Wall Street Journal and the 2 Washington papers investigate aggressively. Magazines (including such unlikely candidates as Vanity Fair) have taken over most of the investigations, and these are usually ignored by the mainstream press. Many of our best items were published in relatively mainstream magazines such as Financial World, The Nation, and National Review, without being repeated in the New York Times, Time or TV news.
Is This a Blog?
The Skeleton Closet is NOT a blog — if anything, it’s the ANTI-blog. This is an organized, well-researched archive. Blogs live totally in the moment. They’re the work of obsessed individuals who post any new tidbit they find, every few minutes at times, for an obsessed audience desperate for the latest tidbit. Quality, accuracy and perspective are all less important than speed and novelty.
We don’t care about getting out some fact — with less reliability — 3 hours before the Washington Post does. Our goal is to have solid information, with perspective, humor and insight, available 24/7. Most presidential candidates are 45-70 years old. Their character isn’t going to change in the next 6 hours, or the next 6 years.
But because this is politics, accuracy is critical. That’s why we list our sources at the bottom of each page, and welcome corrections and perspective via email. We use books and mainstream publications as our sources, not rumors, blog speculation and anonymous tips that probably come from the opponent’s campaign.
Frankly, the regular media does a pretty damn good job of uncovering scandals, if you know how to research and dig them up. Their problem is ignoring ones that aren’t new, and fear of providing perspective and personality in their coverage. This makes it easy to manipulate reporters — in fact, a standard technique for political consultants is to leak their own candidate’s scandal, but at a time when no one is paying attention (and ideally, to a disreputable journalist.) Then, in the heat of the campaign, they can argue that this is “old news”, and the press will usually ignore it.
Our goal is not reporting news. We’re the SECOND draft of history, character portraits of people asking for the most powerful job in the world. The scatterbrain, unreliable world of blogs is the last place to look for information that important.
We could go on, but we’re all too busy trying to make a living. So are you, probably.”
He's a liberal. And FR will not support him.
Go ahead, try to change the subject. Won’t work though, as the subject matter is your boy Newt, who has pondscum for morals. But then it appears you can excuse such behavior at the drop of a hat. What does that say about your moral character? Hypocrite.
“Gingrich has openly repented of his past mistakes ...”
Yes; his excuse was that he was so busy working for the American people that he ... blah, blah ...
Whatever. If Newt is the nominee, I will vote for him (so strong is my loathing for the current administration).
Your liberal has NO deeply held conservative beliefs. None. He will say ANYTHING to get elected.
He may very well be behind this woman shooting off her mouth. AGAIN. It certainly took him, Bain and McCains opposition research off the mainpage, didn't it.
You of all people do not qualify to judge other people on their “moral” character.
Moral behavior is best illustrated in a person’s ability to forgive, as well as refrain from judging others for things that have long sinced past, especially for those things that have long since been forgiven. Not to mention the honesty that Mr. Gingrich has himself, both admitted and fully disclosed.
Harboring such vile hate and venom, as you regularly do, merely illustrates the character of your own soul. The lack of forgiveness you so arrogantly display is merely a reflection you who and what you are. You accuse others of being a “Hypocrite” very freely, mainly because you see mostly in others what you fail (and refuse) to see in yourself.
I'm not trying to exonerate Newt. He's a complete scumbag.
And he has my vote and $.
I was trying to save you the grief associate with your sourcing. I think you can see that now.
Drudge is totally in the tank for Romney.
That was harsh, boss. A class of 98?
See post 185. A class of ‘98 Freeper is no more.
Jim, that is an excellent way to put it! Your tag line says it all!
I had nothing to do with it. Somebody just told me. I had ignored her insults. I always do.
Jim had already warned her once.
And there are plenty of older signups boosting mittens.
Happy about that?
To me, it is all interesting, worthy of a listen, and character-revealing. Marianne comes off as honest, as does Larry Sinclair. I’d like to know that these two individuals who sought the presidency, Obama and newt, both thought it was ok to get some from someone other than their spouse, and still felt they were the right one to lead every man, woman, and child in America.
I disagree. I think someone who wants bj’s from a man not his wife while he smokes some crack is not fit to lead us. Ever. I think that a man who cheats on his wife for six years and at some point asks the wife if she will give him the blessing to keep coming home covered in the mistress’s perfume is also not fit to lead us.
No bigamy. No down low.
I’ve said this before - I’ll say it again. Mittens (and his FReeper supporters) doesn’t bother me half as much as the Paultards at Free Republic.
Ron Paul has done (and is doing) serious damage to the conservative movement. He is a tool of the liberal left and is alinged with every kook fringe group in the USA.
And Jim lets Paultards have almost complete immunity to spout Paul’s racist, kooky, trufer messages. And all the while Paul has been pulling votes away from Gringrich, Santorum and Perry.
WHO is benefitting from the damage Paul is doing to the GOP? Willard of course.
So dammit Jim. Try zotting more Paultards who are infesting this site, and then yes. I’ll be happy now.
You DO know that they were separated from 1988 to 1994, right? And that she was the “other woman” in his first marriage? It takes chutzpah to be the “injured” spouse.
I don’t follow your reasoning at all.