Posted on 11/11/2011 7:43:07 PM PST by rabscuttle385
Newt Gingrich's campaign is pushing back against criticism that the former Speaker consulted with embattled mortgage lender Freddie Mac, insisting that Gingrich did not lobby on behalf of the government corporation.
Gingrich was pressed on the ties during Wednesday evening's Republican debate — the Speaker was paid $300,000 in 2006 — but insisted that he only met with Freddie in his capacity as a historian, not as a lobbyist.
"I have never done any lobbying," Gingrich said. "Every contract was written during the period when I was out of the office, specifically said I would do no lobbying, and I offered advice."
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
He’s lying! He said that Freddie was a model organization when conservatives were trying to reform it before the economic collapse.....pull your heads out of the sand folks, Newt is Establishment
Oh Newt! You are so cute when you lobby...errr...give advice. here’s some advice: STFU and don’t mess this election up. TY from your fellow Republicans...errr..I mean REAL Republicans. Everytime I finish reading about this man, Iget a sudden urge to take a shower and clean myself off. RINO
“He’s lying! He said that Freddie was a model organization when conservatives were trying to reform it before the economic collapse.....pull your heads out of the sand folks, Newt is Establishment”
If he said that, and I take you at your word, he does have a LOT to answer for. It’s one thing for Barney Frank to support these thieves, it’s another for a prominent Republican to do so.
...sounds like he has a “Perry problem”.
So.... what did newt do for the 300 grand?
Do you have a link for that information? I would appreciate it very much.
Speaking of Perry, where are the Perrypals tonight?
Does he really think we'd believe that Freddie paid $300K for a history lesson?
Makes sense to me.....
A “government corporation” is something that should never exist.
A lobbyist goes to government officials to try to get “x” for the company he/she represents. Newt was paid for advice, not to go to officials to get “x”. Newt also says they didn’t take his advice. That shouldn’t be a surprise. They kept runnning it in the ground.
“Speaking of Perry, where are the Perrypals tonight?”
The Ohio babe told me that her shift starts at 3 AM tonight (Central). She has to work this weekend, pretty bumbed. She does have next weekend off though. Benefits are good though.
The others have been told to quiet down a bit. They weren’t really helping much and with Perry’s latest flub, they get some down time to re-organize their thoughts.
The campaign is also having a tough time figuring out who to attack now that Cain, Romney, and Newt are almost tied, so they’re waiting to see who’s head pops up.
I don’t think most people know why lobbyists do, they just have heard lobbyists = bad for so long it’s fixed in their minds. When they hear the word they immediately go into the same mode they go into when they hear other charged words like banker or boogieman.
Newt is part of the beltway insiders. Even if he was not lobbying what the hell is he getting $300,000 for???
I know who will REALLY work toward stopping all the worthless glutenous govt spending, IT IS CAIN!!!
I think they’re here, they just keep forgetting what they were going to say. ;>)
Sorry... I just couldn’t help myself.
I am so glad that someone, such as you, is paying attention. That is how he explained it at the debate.
In 1995, Jim Johnson (Fannie Mae CEO) the corrupt liberal SOB responsible for damaging our economy more than any other single person (in my opinion) was in the process of opening up Fannie Mae branches all over the country.
James Johnson saw the company as the cash cow it was for the bureaucrats who ran it, and implemented a strategy that was on the job 24x7 with eyes and ears everywhere. He created Fannie Mae branches in a huge number of cities across America (I think it was between 50 and 100) staffed by like-minded people who served as the canary in the coal mine for any push back. They had armies of powerful lobbyists with lots of important connections.
At the opening of one of these branches in Atlanta he got on stage with that guy, and this is what he said:
Gingrich: "Fannie Mae is an excellent example of a former government institution fulfilling its mandate while functioning in the market economy...Fannie Mae has had a regional presence in Atlanta for over 40 years and the announcement of a partnership office demonstrates its continued commitment to affordable housing in the Atlanta metropolitan area."
(Note that as the authors state, it was COMPLETELY FALSE AND INACCURATE to characterize Fannie Mae as a "former government institution".)
More to the point...Newt shouldn't have been up on the stage with this guy because he was a crook and a damned evil liberal hack, he shouldn't have been up there because he was for small government (and Fannie Mae was the complete ANTITHESIS of that) and he shouldn't have praised Fannie Mae, which more than any other institution has damaged the economy immeasurably.
In my opinion, there is a lot to like about Newt and the way he changed the political scene when he entered it, but I have a hard time explaining his support for Fannie Mae. He isn't the same guy he was in 1994.
I think it’s called consulting, which is not the same as lobbying. I don’t think he’s hidden the fact that he was a consultant. I appreciate that you are for Cain (I like him too) but consulting and lobbying are two different things. If you have a consulting business and someone hires you to give them advice, that’s what you do.
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.