Don't Be Fooled In 2012!!
Keep Up With The REAL News
Conservatives Need From FR
Help Keep It Going !!
Sponsoring FReepers are contributing
$10 Each time a New Monthly Donor signs up!
Get more bang for your FR buck!
Click Here To Sign Up Now!
Posted on 01/24/2012 10:04:04 PM PST by County Agent Hank Kimball
"Given all the attention to the ethics matter, it's worth asking what actually happened back in 1995, 1996, and 1997. The Gingrich case was extraordinarily complex, intensely partisan, and driven in no small way by a personal vendetta on the part of one of Gingrich's former political opponents. It received saturation coverage in the press; a database search of major media outlets revealed more than 10,000 references to Gingrich's ethics problems during the six months leading to his reprimand. It ended with a special counsel hired by the House Ethics Committee holding Gingrich to an astonishingly strict standard of behavior, after which Gingrich in essence pled guilty to two minor offenses. Afterwards, the case was referred to the Internal Revenue Service, which conducted an exhaustive investigation into the matter. And then, after it was all over and Gingrich was out of office, the IRS concluded that Gingrich did nothing wrong. After all the struggle, Gingrich was exonerated...."
(Excerpt) Read more at campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com ...
Will read later, heading out of town for the afternoon.
What the heck is up with her. She's been on my "S" list for some time now for endorsing Romney and speaking out against Newt in the negative, vile rhetoric she is so well known to sling at liberals. Has she defected? Has she lost her mind? Or is she just an attention whore whose extremist point of view needs a narrcisstic hug every now and again.
Please ping me on anything ACTIVIST for the Newt. I love stirring the pot in southern Rhode Island.
Vendome will be posting an abridged version today sometime.
But ITMT here the original post.
Maine-iac7 is putting together a ping list. Let her know if you want to be on it.
Please ping when posted. Vampires hate sunlight, especially when their botox starts to melt.
Gingrich himself, not wanting to dredge up the whole ugly tale, said little about his exoneration. "I consider this a full and complete vindication," he wrote in a brief statement. "I urge my colleagues to go back and read their statements and watch how they said them, with no facts, based on nothing more than a desire to politically destroy a colleague."Now, Gingrich is saying much the same thing in the face of Romney's accusations. And despite the prominence of the matter in the GOP race, few outsiders seem inclined to dive back into the ethics matter to determine whether Gingrich deserves the criticism or not. But if Gingrich is to have any hope of climbing out from under the allegations, he'll have to find some way of letting people know what really happened.
Is Byron York right? Does Gingrich have to address ethics charges that he eventually won?
I think he does, and that's because of the underlined parts in the first paragraph. Note that he says it was "his colleagues" who tried to destroy him. He is not talking only about democrats. Many republicans, including John Boehner, were in that group of republicans.
I'm sure one of the reasons these folks fear a Newt presidency is because they're afraid of payback. It's hell. It's William Wallace coming in retribution against those who betrayed him.
Which, I doubt that Newt would do because he's a pragmatist if he's anything.
I think he should carry a little clipping from the time in which the headline is GINGRICH EXHONERATED is prominent.
He should simply say, "Romney/Santorum/Paul (whichever) has just said something they know to be false. They said I violated ethics. Here's a headline from the time: GINGRICH EXHONERATED. Now either this headline is a lie, and it isn't, or this politician running for office is playing fast and loose with the truth."
Newt needs to stop focusing entirely on Romney's bad policy choices and start focusing ALSO on his unelectability. He needs to sow doubt.
Romney's greatest strength is all the press for over a year calling Romney the most electable. Newt needs to hit that and not just things like obamacare, gay marriage, abortion, etc.
Newt stated he would rather have Nancy Pelosi attack him than endorse him. LOL! this is OLD news...the report is online.
Time to NewterRomney
ping
Newt needs to wrap Romney in the facts that Bain, which probably still pays out to Romney, also had money tied into Fredi Mac and Fanni Mae and also that Romny’s Bains thought Muslim money for a mosque was more important than holding a bit of 9/11 ground sacred to the memory of people killed by Muslims. This kind of capitalism is not good for the USA today or for recognition of our Constitution. Even the robber barons of past centuries had some sense of using their greed for the benefit of USA populace.
I agree. BAin money in Fred/Fann, especially during romney’s tenure, is fair game.
And supporting the ground zero mosque is a big target.
Newt NEEDS to go after Romney’s mythical electability
It’s not F&F that Mit is worried about it’s Bain’s connection to Bilderberg. Freepers are on it, but much of the materials are already being scrubbed from the web.
Prayers needed that truth WILL win.
You’ve got mail :0)
do you have a link?
Thanks for the ping. Good stuff!
I have to go take care of some business stuff.
I’ll have this thing posted tonight.
Rough sketch. Trying not to tell a story but make it interesting, impactful and bulleted highlights so anyone with ADHD can scan it without falling asleep.
Thinking I’ll include links so anyone who wants to research on their own and verify won’t have to work so hard.
9PM at the latest.
Some of you have my phone number if you have anything you want to say or discuss.
Later.
My sincere apologies, I had NO clue.
My best guess is FEAR, and she knows no other way to communicate about and to those she considers inferior to her special intellect. But this time the 'facts' are not on her side.
the establishment puts out pansy’s to run, they think that if they’re nice to the MSM and the left they will be liked and that is why they back Romney they still did not learn from 2008 and then 2010 when we said enough is enough and now they put out another RINO and think we will just shut up and vote for their guy
WELL NO MORE FOR ME.
The MSM hates the right and no matter how much the GOP sucks up to them they will always be bias towards them
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.