Is that implied threat that I’ll be removed if I disagree with my fellow “Conservatives” (quotes for that word). Sounds like what liberals do when they can’t argue facts of an issue or case they just threaten and want to shut us up. They don’t actually respond to the facts. Any denial that Newt wasn’t for Global warming? Any denial that he was for Mandates? Any denial he made millions of dollars as a lobbyist? Denial that he lobbied for Freddie Mac and made 1.6 million? Denial that polls show Independent hate the hell out of him? Denials that he was kicked from congress and fined 300,000? Denial the “non insiders” the Tea Party of the early 90’s wanted to overthrow him because he was the “insider” playing ball? Or just gonna call me names.
Go,
I won’t call you names. I will, however point out that you seem to have a propensity to forget that when Newt was busting chops he was doing it against a popular two-term Prsident. Was he a Chameleon? Maybe. But what the hell is Romney? Thats ALL we have left. Newt will take the fight to the other side of the field, he will represent us better than anyone remaining could possibly do. This guy wll NOT back down, and win or lose, we’re going to be better off that America saw these upcoming debates.
The enemy is Obama, and he needs to be clearly defined. Newt will do just that!
Newt 2012
Fact Check: Latest Ad by Pro-Romney Super PAC “Restore Our Future” Contains Numerous Lies and Falsehoods
Atlanta, GA - Newt 2012 released a fact sheet today responding to the latest dishonest attack ad aired by pro-Romney Super-Pac “Restore our Future”:
Falsehood: Freddie Mac paid Newt $30,000 an hour - $1.6 million.
The Truth:
“I think less than maybe once a month, they [Freddie Mac] would drop by. We’d spend an hour [talking].”
-Newt Gingrich, On the Record with Greta Van Susteren, 11/17/11
It is this remark which the Super-Pac uses to justify this gross distortion.
First, Freddie Mac was a client of the Gingrich Group, a firm with thirty employees and offices in three cities. The client fees were not paid directly to Newt, they were paid to the company, and the vast majority of it went to staff salaries, health insurance, rent and other overhead.
Second, like any consulting firm, a great deal of work and research goes into the recommendations given. Newt and his staff spent time preparing for these meetings, putting in hours of research to bring a well informed opinion. To report that a one hour meeting is the extent of their work is ignorant of standard business practice.
Falsehood: Gingrich teamed up with Nancy Pelosi on global warming.
The Truth: Newt absolutely opposes “cap and trade,” which Nancy Pelosi supports, as well as any system of taxing carbon emissions. He testified before Congress against the Nancy Pelosi-backed cap and trade effort in 2009 and led a grassroots effort while he was the Chairman of American Solutions to block its passage in the House and Senate. Newt repeatedly states there is no scientific evidence to justify a large government, centralized response.
Falsehood: Together [Gingrich & Pelosi] they co-sponsored a bill that gave $60 million a year to a U.N. program supporting China’s brutal “One Child” policy.
The Truth: Newt never voted for this legislation and this never became law. Additionally, Ronald Reagan’s Mexico City Policy was in place in 1989, which would have prevented any money going toward abortions in support of China’s One Child Policy:
“As to US contributions to the United Nations Fund for Population Activities, their continuation will be conditional on “concrete assurances” that no part of the US monies will be used for abortion and the Fund does not support abortion or coercive family planning programs.”
-US Policy Statement for the International Conference on Population, 1984
This policy applied to any legislation passed through 1993, and implicitly prohibits any US funds from going to China’s One Child policy.
Falsehood: As Speaker, Gingrich even supported taxpayer funding of some abortions.
The Truth:
“House Speaker Newt Gingrich on Sunday supported the availability of federally- financed abortions for poor women who are victims of rape or incest.”
-Chicago Tribune, April 10, 1995
Newt supported Hyde amendment language, which prohibits federal funding for abortions. This language often makes exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the mother, and is supported by conservative members of Congress. These clauses were found in the Republican supported Stupak Amendment to President Obama’s healthcare bill. Newt recognized that an outright ban on federal funding of abortion would not be signed by Bill Clinton, and worked to remove federal abortion funding as much as possible in the existing political framework.
Falsehood: [Newt] was fined $300,000 for ethics violations by a Republican Congress.
The Truth: 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. The agreement specifically noted that the payment was not a fine, but instead a “cost assessment.” The House vote affirmed this agreement.
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.”
For more facts about Newt Gingrich’s record, please visit Newt.org/answers.
###
Contact: R.C. Hammond
rch@newt.org
Bozell Statement: Newt Was Found Innocent Nearly 13 Years Ago – Networks Have Yet To Report It
By Brent Bozell | December 07, 2011 | 14:40
50
Change font size: A | A
Brent Bozell’s picture
Following the recent threats from Nancy Pelosi and the heavy brush with which the media are painting Newt Gingrich as unethical, the Media Research Center is now calling on the networks to seize the moment and report the truth from nearly 13 years ago.
It has been 4,689 days since the IRS formally cleared Newt Gingrich of any violation of tax law. It’s been 4,689 days since ABC, CBS, and NBC have had the opportunity to report it. What the heck. Why not today? Now is the time for these networks to report the truth for once. The networks owe it to the American people to report the fact that in 1999 the IRS completely vindicated Gingrich.
Between December 15, 1996 and January 31, 1997 the network morning and evening newscasts filed a staggering 244 stories. Total number of network stories on the news that Newt was completely innocent? Zero. That’s beyond pathetic.
Oh and what about CNN? We found that the cable network filed one — count ‘em, one — story. They’re probably exhausted by all that effort, so we’ll let them off the hook.
See Bozell’s column “ Newt Is Vindicated, But Nobody Knows It” in February of 1999, detailing how the IRS cleared Gingrich of any violation of the tax laws but was spiked from being covered by ABC, CBS and NBC News.
House Rep’s statement on Newt Gingrich’s Non Fine...
Numerous statements from elected officials and other individuals associated with the Committee’s investigation make it clear that the sanction levied against Speaker Gingrich was nothing more than a cost assessment. In presenting the Report to the Members of the House, former Congresswoman Nancy Johnson (R-CT) characterized the Speaker’s payment in the following manner:
“Likewise in past cases where the committee imposed monetary sanctions on a Member, the committee found that the Member had been personally enriched by the misconduct. The committee made no such finding against Representative Gingrich, yet recommends that a cost reimbursement of $300,000 be paid to the House by him.”
Likewise, Democrat Congressman Adam Schiff (D-CA), a member of the Investigation Subcommittee, described the Report findings in the Congressional Record as follows:
“Based upon the allegation, the violations we found, the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct on a 7-to-1 vote, full committee now, entire committee, recommended the following penalty. It recommended a reprimand and a cost assessment of $300,000. . . . We set $300,000 as the estimated costs of that portion of the investigation that dealt with clearing up the misstatements that we received, which may be begun to be prepared in Mr. Gingrich’s law firm, but for which he is responsible as Member of the House.”
Indeed, even Democrat Congressman (now Senator) Ben Cardin (D-MD) agreed on the proper classification of the Speaker’s $300,000 payment. In his remarks to the House urging adoption of the Ethics Committee Report and Resolution, then-Congressman Cardin described the proposed sanction against Speaker Gingrich in the following manner:
“It provides a reprimand plus a required $300,000 contribution by Mr. Gingrich to the cost of these proceedings.”
Moreover, in the transcript of the sanctions proceedings before the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, Special Counsel to the House Ethics Committee James Cole could not have made it more clear when he responded to questions from Congressman Thomas Sawyer (D-OH) as follows:
“In addition, this is not a fine that we are recommending. The rule book says that a fine is an appropriate sanction when a member has received personal gain. And as Mr. Smith had asked and as I told him, no, we did not find that.”
In sum, there was never any fine levied against Speaker Gingrich as a result of the findings of the House Ethics Committee Report referenced in the subject advertisements. Any statement to the contrary in any broadcast communication produced on behalf of Governor Romney, any other presidential candidate, or any SuperPAC is all at once false, misleading, and defamatory.