Posted on 01/06/2012 8:03:28 PM PST by true believer forever
"It has recently come to our attention that your station has either been asked to run, or may soon be asked to run, various advertising spots produced by the Mitt Romney aligned SuperPAC “Restore Our Future” or Romney for President, the principal campaign committee of Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney. Included among the Romney advertisements submitted to your station for broadcast are likely to be various advertisements which specifically mention Speaker Gingrich and purport to quote or reference the findings of a 1997 report issued by the House Select Committee on Ethics (the “Report”).
The content of these advertisements state and/or suggest that, Speaker Gingrich was “fined” $300,000 for “violations” of congressional rules. These statements are NOT TRUE. In fact, ANY statement, suggestion, or innuendo that Speaker Gingrich was assessed a congressional fine for violations of House Ethics Rules is fundamentally false and misleading. If published after your receipt of this letter, it will be a knowing publication of a false statement. As such, it represents a defamatory communication which exposes this station to potential civil liability. In turn, we do hereby DEMAND that your station immediately REFUSE, and if started, CEASE airing any such advertisements and refrain from broadcasting their content until such time as the libelous statements have been removed."
(Excerpt) Read more at gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com ...
But he was charged $300K as a ‘reprimand’ and ‘sanction’.
But he was charged $300K as a ‘reprimand’ and ‘sanction’.
Ask him who he's for and I would guess, he's for a manager (governor) who looks at our nation's problems as manageable, not in need of radical changes.
He also frequented Sarah Palin threads to tear her down, so Newt Gingrich is not his first target.
I’m not moved that you don’t think Newt Gingrich is a conservative.
I am heartened that Jim Robinson thinks he is, right along with hosts of several others whom I admire, like Thomas Sowell who’s endorsed him.
Okay, it is NOT a fine.
Gingrich still had to pay $300k.
Parsing and nuancing is NOT going to change that.
Gingrich paid it in installments, part of which he borrowed from Bob Dole.
And it helped in ending Gingrich’s speakership.
Thanks very much for your mail. I am not speaking out of turn. Please feel free to post the links on the threads.
We need to get your excellent research information out.
I am busy with our FReepathon, but will try to see whether some can get posted as separate threads or one article and go from there.
DOWN WITH ROMNEY! CORRUPTION DELUXE!
DOWN WITH ROVE! CORRUPTION DELUXE!
Yes, TomGuy,
The Democrats got him. They were angry for the work he forced them to do and they worked hard to get him out.
And they will continue to do that to ANYONE that goes against their agenda, you know that.
WE need the voices of reason, and to use the truth.
If they can find a speeding ticket they will use it. They will make stuff up as in President Bush.
We will NOT find some one perfect like Our Lord Jesus Christ
to run for president, Humanly impossible.
We have the right tools, We have our Faith, Mercy, and truth.
We need to use these things to help us.
We need to pray and not massacre our own.
What has “never been proven”? That Gingrich’s firm had a contract with Freddie? That Gingrich was paid? That he did work for them? That is all fact. Gingrich has said so. The mystery is exactly what he did, and how much he personally was paid for it, as opposed to his firm getting paid for it.
I have no idea why Gingrich thinks that is a distinction worth arguing over — given that Gingrich is correctly attackign Romney for what Romney’s company did, it’s hard to see how Gingrich can disavow the actions of his firm, whatever they are.
It appears to be, although it could also be whether the money was charged by the committee, or by the House, and whether it was itself a “punishment”, or a “repayment”.
Officially, it was a “repayment” ordered by the House from Gingrich to the committee, to reimburse the committee for work it had to do because of Gingrich’s misleading inputs to the committee.
It was part of the settlement that Gingrich agreed to, and which the House passed in it’s resolution against Gingrich, so it was associated with the punishment. It is a distinction that would seem to be without a difference.
For comparison, suppose someone sued you, and you fought the lawsuit, and you lost, and in addition to whatever penalty is assessed, you are also ordered to pay the person’s attorney fees. Would you argue that the fees were not part of the payment? Well, you might if you were trying to dismiss the severity. But if you were filing a claim with your persnal liability insurance, I am sure you’d include it as part of the fine you were assessed.
That supposedly “unbiased” site fails to mention this key fact...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2011-12-25/newt-gingrich-ethics-investigation/52215712/1
The ethics committee back then made no finding on whether Gingrich’s use of tax-exempt groups to raise money was illegal. It said it would let the Internal Revenue Service determine if any tax laws were broken. In 1999, the IRS said they were not.
Gingrich said...83 charges were repudiated as false. “The one mistake we made was a letter written by a lawyer that I didn’t read carefully,” he said.
I prefer to think for myself.
“Newt agreed to the deal”
1. All of us know of many cases in which an innocent person enters into some bargain to avoid further persecution.
2. Your source is the Washington Post, a nasty, septic swamp of lying commie faggots. Nothing they have to say on any subject is even remotely credible.
LOL, dozens of sources say the same thing. Sorry but that is the way it was.
“LOL, dozens of sources say the same thing. Sorry but that is the way it was.”
Rather than laughing out loud, I suspect you are laughing your brains out.
I followed this issue very closely at the time, and can assure you that the version you’re spreading is nothing but a false and distorted leftist narrative.
Wrong, but you can believe whatever your wish to lie to yourself about.
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.