Posted on 01/26/2012 5:48:34 AM PST by Halfmanhalfamazing
After nearly a week on the defensive, CNN's John King reports tonight that Newt Gingrich's claim about offering witnesses to ABC News in his defense — to rebut the network's interview with his second wife, Marianne Gingrich — was not true.
"Tonight, after persistent questioning by our staff, the Gingrich campaign concedes now Speaker Gingrich was wrong — both in his debate answer, and in our interview yesterday," King said on tonight's edition of John King USA. "Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond says the only people the Gingrich campaign offered to ABC were his two daughters from his first marriage."
An important victory for John King in his ongoing effort to justify last Thursday's confrontation.
Newt said "they", and I think he's referring to ABC news. "they" weren't interested is something he has repeatedly said.
But look at how John King uses this. There are two video clips that King uses, I would like to see more of the second video beyond what King clipped and used.
Anybody know where to get it? I have a feeling that King is lying here, yet again.
Why do I not believe King?
Ok, I am confused.
Gingrich said witness were offered, weren’t his daughters witnesses?
So how is Gingrich’s statement witness were offered a lie?
The media, Fox News included, has no credibility left whatsoever.
—Ok, I am confused.
Gingrich said witness were offered, weren’t his daughters witnesses?
So how is Gingrich’s statement witness were offered a lie?—
That is exactly what I was wondering. You saved me having to cut and paste from the article. Thank you. :-)
Newt specifically said several personal friends were willing to come forward. That's the part that wasn't true -- only his daughters were available to ABC.
Even as a Newt supporter, it's pretty clear to me in the videos. I don't know how the rest of you are missing that.
When muckrakers like John King are more interested in ex-wives from 20 years ago, more than Saul Alinsky, Rev. Wright, Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, etc, etc, we know we are in good hands.
Something doesn't make sense.
Just like Wile E Coyote
How'd that pan out?
Ann Coulter defended King so he must be right. :)
AP you have a point in your statement.
I am still not getting this issue, maybe it’s to early in the morning.
If I were making the statement I might refer to my daughters a friends, to avoid them being hounded.
However, for me they were witnesses just as Gingrich said - offered witnesses.
Oh, well in the whole scheme of things it is not a big issue to me - friends - daughters.
Sounds like an artful quote from King. Maybe the “campaign” didn’t “offer” anyone else, however the other witnesses exist and ABC knew it. Further, it seems to me Marianne’s claim was false just based on her own statements.
I think it is important to hear from Newt on this.
This is typical hack partisan journalism - interpret reality however you want, then get your story out first, like a little kid crying to his Mommy about his older brother.
This is like a jury hearing only one side of the evidence.
So did David Gergen!
could anyone tell what that paper said that the guy flashed before the camera?
ooops wrong thread
The media and Obama campaign's strategy--having taken note of Newt's thin-skinned nature---- will be to keep him on constant defense against claims about his past, or inconsistencies in his statements, hoping he will have one of his mini(or worse)meltdowns. He's going to have to steel himself for that, because letting loose on his adversaries will undermine his support in a general election. I've known many voters who are unnerved by negativity in campaigns, particularly those who aren't fully committed to a particular candidate.
I want to see a statement in quotations from Newt Gingrich saying “I admit my ABC claims were false.”
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.