Drudge: Gingrich’s ex-wife is ready to dish; Update: Excerpts to be released before debate; Update: Nothing new revealed in interview?

posted at 8:06 pm on January 18, 2012 by Allahpundit

You know who this benefits?

Marianne Gingrich has said she could end her ex-husband’s career with a single interview. Earlier this week, she sat before ABCNEWS cameras, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

She spoke to ABCNEWS reporter Brian Ross for two hours. Her explosive revelations are set to rock the campaign. But now a “civil war” has erupted inside of the network, an insider claims, on exactly when the confession will air!

Just a little more late intrigue for a race that’s already in flux from Newt’s post-debate surge, Palin’s quasi-endorsement, Santorum’s possible victory in Iowa (the official results will be announced tomorrow morning), Perry’s uncertain status vis-a-vis calls for him to drop out, and yet another debate tomorrow night. Drudge says the interview’s tentatively set to air Monday, after the vote in South Carolina, but reporters from Politico and the NYT are hearing it’ll air … tomorrow, presumably before the debate. I’m surprised his ex didn’t insist that it be broadcast ASAP. If she’s coming clean now after years of silence, just as he’s readying his last stand against Romney, she’s obviously doing it to try to take him out. If you were her, wouldn’t you want it to drop before the primary?

Actually, she hasn’t been completely silent. Go read the Esquire piece from 2010 that everyone will be murmuring about until this thing finally airs. Quote:

Back in the 1990s, she told a reporter she could end her husband’s career with a single interview. She held her tongue all through the affair and the divorce and even through the annulment Gingrich requested from the Catholic Church two years later, trying to erase their shared past. Now she sits quietly for a moment, ignoring her eggs, trying to decide how far she wants to go.

Here’s the most sensational bit, after she found out about Gingrich’s new mistress:

She kind of guessed it, of course. Women usually do. But did she know the woman was in her apartment, eating off her plates, sleeping in her bed?

She called a minister they both trusted. He came over to the house the next day and worked with them the whole weekend, but Gingrich just kept saying she was a Jaguar and all he wanted was a Chevrolet. “‘I can’t handle a Jaguar right now.’ He said that many times. ‘All I want is a Chevrolet.’”

He asked her to just tolerate the affair, an offer she refused.

He’d just returned from Erie, Pennsylvania, where he’d given a speech full of high sentiments about compassion and family values.

The next night, they sat talking out on their back patio in Georgia. She said, “How do you give that speech and do what you’re doing?”

“It doesn’t matter what I do,” he answered. “People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.”

If her interview runs along those lines — Gingrichian egomania and hypocrisy but nothing criminal or lurid — I don’t know how much it’ll change things. You never know what information voters have and haven’t fully assimilated about a candidate, but Newt’s “values” problems have been public knowledge long enough that I take it they’re already mostly priced into his stock. He’s going to say she’s a disgruntled ex who’s making things up and, in any case, that he’s found redemption in his faith since the divorce. Unless she’s got a bombshell she’s ready to drop, how many voters thinking of voting for him at this point will really think twice?

Exit question: If the interview does air tomorrow, how hard will Santorum and Romney go after him at the debate over it? Santorum’s desperate to have social conservatives unite behind him, but this is an awfully messy attack to try with the, er, “Chevrolet” sitting in the audience in front of him.

Update: Word from the AP is that the interview will indeed air tomorrow — but on “Nightline,” after the debate. How they’re going to get through two hours with that sword of Damocles hanging over the event, I have no idea.

Looks like Newt’s daughters (from his first marriage) will be key to the damage control here:

As tentative plans to air the interview were disclosed, Gingrich’s campaign released a statement from his two daughters from his first marriage – Kathy Lubbers and Jackie Cushman – suggesting that Marianne Gingrich’s comments may be suspect given emotional toll divorce takes on everyone involved.

“Anyone who has had that experience understands it is a personal tragedy filled with regrets, and sometimes differing memories of events.

“We will not say anything negative about our father’s ex-wife,” they said. “He has said before, privately and publicly, that he regrets any pain he may have caused in the past to people he loves.”

Update: This is going to be some debate. Says Brian Stelter of the NYT, “ABC spokesman confirms: Marianne Gingrich interview WILL air Thur on ‘Nightline.’ Excerpts to be released earlier, i.e. before CNN debate.” So supposedly the network was wracked with anxiety over whether it’d be ethical to air the interview before the primary, and now not only are they going to do that, they’re actually going to … try to affect the debate with the timing of the release. Hello?

Update: Good lord. After all the hype tonight, is this thing actually going to be a giant nothingburger? Howard Kurtz:

A knowledgeable insider says that Newt Gingrich’s second wife does not say anything in the taped interview with ABC News that she hasn’t said in previous print interviews. But to repeat her account of how their marriage failed—because the then-House speaker was having an affair—in a form that can be endlessly replayed on television could prove a serious distraction for the presidential candidate two days before the South Carolina primary.

As Nate Silver said on Twitter tonight, imagine how epic Newt’s media-bashing will be at the debate tomorrow. Imagine.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 12 13 14

Its the “end of life” for Mitt.He should just withdraw. He has absolutely no chance

gerrym51 on January 19, 2012 at 9:51 AM

My question is: Why is ABC doing this? Why will the reelect-Obama-media take steps to manipulate the primary process so that Gingrich is knocked out and only Romney is left standing? I thought Romney was the stronger candidate, so why would the liberal media want him there all alone?

Burke on January 19, 2012 at 9:57 AM

This R campaign season is turning into a soap opera. One guy already dropped out when women from his past appeared outta nowhere, now the ex shows up for Newt and the front runner is hiding money in the Caymans. Perry, the only clean guy in the race can’t stop tripping over his shoe laces and now he drops out. Compare this to the campaigner in chief who has a lovely family and a hidden past and we will get another 4 years.

Kissmygrits on January 19, 2012 at 10:01 AM

My question is: Why is ABC doing this?

Burke on January 19, 2012 at 9:57 AM

Because people will tune in?

EddieC on January 19, 2012 at 10:03 AM

Women do care about stuff like this, trust me, I am an expert on women.

Oh and for all “ya’ll” berating people for being giddy over a media attack on a Republican candidate, take a look in the mirror. Remember the attacks on Bain?

Perhaps we shall call Newt a vulture adulterer or a crony husband?

antisense on January 19, 2012 at 9:10 AM

You can not speak for all woman. Even if you are a woman or think that you are an expert on them.

dmn1972 on January 19, 2012 at 10:03 AM

They are scared of Newt.
A lot.

Romney is a run of the mill old style politician..they know how to manipulate that.

Newt is able to use a version of the Obama tactics against them, i.e. “you don’t know how to deal with me, and I’ll just put stuff out there and…what you gonna do about it?”

This is the tactic that Obama used to get elected and one that he has used to this day to affect this country and its foundations..”Laws?..pffft…constitution?…pfffft…established procedure?…pffft..I’m just going to do it..you figure out how to deal with it, and while you’re doing that, I’ll toss another bag of crap at you, and then you figure out how to clean that up”..etc..etc.

Romney???..a run of the mill political marionette..pull this string and that moves.
Doesn’t work with Gingrich imo.

Mimzey on January 19, 2012 at 10:06 AM

He asked her to just tolerate the affair, an offer she refused.

He’d just returned from Erie, Pennsylvania, where he’d given a speech full of high sentiments about compassion and family values.

The next night, they sat talking out on their back patio in Georgia. She said, “How do you give that speech and do what you’re doing?”

“It doesn’t matter what I do,” he answered. “People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.”

I am not sure what has been said in the previous 14 pages of posts here but the above quote is where Gingrich gets hurt because this PLAYS right into what current and former Congressmen/women have said about Gingrich is that he has the utter arrogance that is repelling.

g2825m on January 19, 2012 at 10:11 AM

This is TeamMitt all the way. This could seriously backfire. DRUDGEing up Ex wives and Girlfriends was sleazy when they did it to Cain and its as sleazy now.

Establishment can only fight other Republicans. they roll over and die for Democrats trying to be just like them.

Newts the threat and this is what happens. Im confident he will answer this well. Question the timing of holding it over his head until votes are counted in SC.

boogaleesnots on January 18, 2012 at 8:26 PM

Yes. This is old news.

Mitt’s desperate. The establishment is desperate. Obama and his ABC media sycophants do not want to face Newt; they’d much rather obliterate weak Romney in the general election.

Newt’s been palinized, now he’s being cained.

The timing STINKS to high heaven. I see a major backfire coming also, because the voters aren’t as stupid as the elites think they are.

(Half of the population has been divorced. Nasty things, divorces; woman scorned, etc.)

IndeCon on January 19, 2012 at 10:17 AM

They’re her ste

p-daughters. Their mother is Gingrich’s first wife, Jackie.

AZCoyote on January 19, 2012 at 9:17 AM

I see. Well thanks for the clarification.
I still stand by what I said tho.
I have 3 step daughters.
I consider them my own children.
And even if I did divorce their father, I consider their feelings like I would my own daughter.

Badger40 on January 19, 2012 at 10:17 AM

vIts the “end of life” for Mitt.He should just withdraw. He has absolutely no chance

gerrym51 on January 19, 2012 at 9:51 AM

lol

Yup. We must nominate Mr. Freddie Mac Historian. He is the Tea Party candidate!

haner on January 19, 2012 at 10:19 AM

It would be great if “certain” outlets and blogs ran with the headlines “ABC Using Desperate Measures to Specifically Effect SC Republican Primary”

Make that the narrative.

Odie1941 on January 19, 2012 at 10:21 AM

haner on January 18, 2012 at 6:19 PM

I could not have said it better. I read through many of the comments and I find some very peculiar opinions. Some how Romney is desperate and is behind this because he is so low. Romney Hatred is deep and so deep they ignore the obvious Progressive (Newt).

Newt cannot beat Obama and if you look at the polls and the data behind the polls you would know this to be true. He cannot get the woman vote nor the independents, which if you cannot get independents you lose.

Ugh!

uhangtight on January 19, 2012 at 10:24 AM

It would be great if “certain” outlets and blogs ran with the headlines “ABC Using Desperate Measures to Specifically EAffect SC Republican Primary”

Make that the narrative.

Odie1941 on January 19, 2012 at 10:21 AM

You are correct(ed)! Good one!

Pragmatic on January 19, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Excuse me, did none of you think Obama wouldn’t do this if Newt were the nominee?

Better to do it now early to prevent an Oktober suprise.

antisense on January 19, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Just curious; when will Brian Ross interview and ask probing questions of Jeremiah Wright? Bill Ayers? Mr. Obama’s crazy uncle or destitute aunt?

How about some journalistic revelations on “Fast and Furious”, Solyndra, The Black Panthers Voting case, ignoring a Federal judge in the Gulf/BP case?

Yeah, that’s what I thought.

Marcus Traianus on January 19, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Excuse me, did none of you think Obama wouldn’t do this if Newt were the nominee?

Better to do it now early to prevent an Oktober suprise.

antisense on January 19, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Excellent point. . . Newt can handle it!

Pragmatic on January 19, 2012 at 10:27 AM

vIts the “end of life” for Mitt.He should just withdraw. He has absolutely no chance

gerrym51 on January 19, 2012 at 9:51 AM

lol

Yup. We must nominate Mr. Freddie Mac Historian. He is the Tea Party candidate!

haner on January 19, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Why are you supporting a Democrat (Romney)?

Pragmatic on January 19, 2012 at 10:28 AM

You are correct(ed)! Good one!

Pragmatic on January 19, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Now you know why I married an editor… who clearly is not here ;)

Odie1941 on January 19, 2012 at 10:31 AM

“It doesn’t matter what I do,” he answered. “People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.”

I am not sure what has been said in the previous 14 pages of posts here but the above quote is where Gingrich gets hurt because this PLAYS right into what current and former Congressmen/women have said about Gingrich is that he has the utter arrogance that is repelling.

g2825m on January 19, 2012 at 10:11 AM

I don’t see that as a big deal.
I see how that could be easily spun as a big deal though.
This really is not news. Marianne G. gave several interviews “revealing”.(or is it “reveling”) in her ability to hurt someone who hurt her.

The fact that this is 15 years old and part of the life and belief system that Gingrich has rejected..says more about her than it does about him, imo.

Dog whistle meet populace. Some assembly required.

Mimzey on January 19, 2012 at 10:31 AM

Enough, Allah. Go after ABC. This attack from the far Left media is disgusting. Who’s behind it? What are their names? Who did they vote for in the last election? Of course, it matters — a lot.

RobertMN on January 19, 2012 at 10:32 AM

Nice pic of the ex over on Drudge.
It made my cat do the halloween-cat thing.

justltl on January 19, 2012 at 10:37 AM

First, I think it was a bad idea, for this lady to run to the media with her story. On so many levels. They have courts that will give you more money if you are unhappy. Discretion is everything in not being made into/played for a fool.

That said, we have Newt, Mr. Character flaw, or MS. Character flaw according to S.D.Cupp, this is the funniest thing I have heard in about two weeks: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/newt-gingrich-natural-woman-article-1.1005912?localLinksEnabled=false

Just the fact that the former Mrs. Gingrich exists, and was a scandal along side the Monica Lewinski scandal is enough for me. You can’t join the Catholic church and make it all better.

Fleuries on January 19, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Just curious…why do people blindly accept what this woman says as an accurate representation of actual events?

IMO, anyone who can ruminate for a decade and a half about an emotional event is a person who has “refined” the memories of events.
There are many behavioral experiments over very short time periods that have showed this to be a human trait.

Mimzey on January 19, 2012 at 10:41 AM

, now the ex shows up for Newt and the front runner is hiding money in the Caymans.
Kissmygrits on January 19, 2012 at 10:01 AM

Let’s not help the MSM by repeating their false memes. The story about Romney “hiding” money in the Caymans is baloney. The article admits that Romney isn’t getting any kind of a tax break at all from the Cayman hedge funds, and that it’s SOP for hedge funds to put their HQ’s in the Caymans so that non-U.S. clients can avoid U.S. taxes on the hedge fund-generated profits. The funds’ U.S. clients, like Romney, still have to pay the U.S. taxes, and the article admits that Romney does pay those taxes.

It’s a non-story, hyped-up to try and make something that is not scandalous seem that it is. I’m not a Romney booster, but I’m tired of the MSM trying to destroy non-Obama candidates with these bogus stories about nothing. Notice how we never see any MSM stories about the Obamas’ millions. Apparently, wealth is only evil if it’s held by a non-Democrat.

AZCoyote on January 19, 2012 at 10:50 AM

A pissed off ex-wife saying bad things about her ex-husband. Shocking! Simply shocking! I bet that if they had more time she’d have accused him of eating somebody’s kidney with a fine chianti.

Thanks, Marianne. Counseling is down the hall, first door on the left.

Next.

PorchDawg on January 19, 2012 at 10:50 AM

We all know he had an affair, so unless there was any illegal allegations, then it’s none of our business what was said in the privacy of their home.

lea on January 19, 2012 at 10:51 AM

. The story about Romney “hiding” money in the Caymans is baloney.

I will never vote for Romney, yet I agree with you. I could care less about that story, but I am interested in how he will respond because Obama will bring it up. So far, I have not been impressed with any of his responses or non-responses. This is what vetting is all about, and primary voters have a right to know these things before the nominee is picked, not after when it’s too late.

lea on January 19, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Update: Good lord. After all the hype tonight, is this thing actually going to be a giant nothingburger? Howard Kurtz:

Yes, when the smoke clears, you’ll have a hysterical bitter ex-wife and nothing else. I think I suggested that a couple of posts ago.

We have to stop and REVERSE Obama and the Democrats! That is going to take intelligence, guts and a certain level of mean. Does anything in that sentence sound like Mittens?

Our bus is part way over the cliff. We’ve got to negate the forward motion and stick it into reverse, or we’re going to be really, really unhappy.

And BTW: Did you see what our friends the Russians are saying. Could WWIII be just around the corner?

CrazyGene on January 19, 2012 at 10:56 AM

Just the fact that the former Mrs. Gingrich exists, and was a scandal along side the Monica Lewinski scandal is enough for me. You can’t join the Catholic church and make it all better.

Fleuries on January 19, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Saint Newt? Not on your life.

The guy who can reverse Obama and the Democrats? Probably…

If Jesus was running, I’d vote for him in a flash, but I’ve been told that He has a scheduling conflict and all I’ve got is these guys to pick from.

So I’m going to make my best pick. I want the smart mean guy who has demonstrated his ability to balance the budget and stop the government if necessary.

CrazyGene on January 19, 2012 at 11:00 AM

I love the amazing double standard Newt supporters are using right now. You have to apply your standard of no proof to every facet of the article. With your logic of there being no proof supporting the wife’s statement, thus everything she says is false, we must also apply that to:

Romney directing this
An “establishment” directing this
The Democratic Party directing this
ABC doing this specifically for partisan purposes

If you believe any of those four elements, then you cannot objectively state that Newt’s ex is lying.

Kriggly on January 19, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Good lord. After all the hype tonight, is this thing actually going to be a giant nothingburger?

Yeah. And a cheesy one, to boot.

Yes, Gingrich did some stupid things in his past. But, who hasn’t? People do honestly change their thinking and behavior. I’m willing to give Newt the benefit of a doubt, and also my vote.

TheClearRiver on January 19, 2012 at 11:09 AM

JPeterman on January 19, 2012 at 1:28 AM

Ronald Reagan was divorced, has two liberal twits for kids, and a pretty leftie 2nd wife, didn’t go to church much and had lots of gay friends.

He put communism on the dust heap of history, where it belongs, and from where Obama is trying to resurrect it.

Yesterday’s most significant news were about the Keystone pipeline and lots of implications of not going with it and the news aid Obama to change the subject to Newt being married for the 3rd time, his bitter 2nd wife getting what she gave, and other non-news items.

Rome burns but the fools, on all sides, celebrate or pontificate.

Welcome to the soap opera called U.S. of America, where sinners still change the world, or could, alas.

I hope that Newt, having nothing to lose, but wishing to save the land for his grandchildren, will go ballistic on CNN, against all of America’s enemies. We already know he’s a lout. His god knows too.

Good luck to America and all the best to you. There is one more chance, this Nov.

Schadenfreude on January 19, 2012 at 11:10 AM

(Doorbell):
(Man in black suit) Hello, Mrs. Gingrich?
Yes, what can I do for you?
(Man in suit) We would like you to do another expose on Newt for us.
Who are you anyway?
(Man in suit) We are just concerned citizens vetting the candidates.
I really have nothing further to say on this subject so no thank you!
(Man in suit) You know this is a really nice place you have hear. It would be a shame if something were to happen to it.
Wh wh why yes it would.
(Man in suit) I also have it on good sources that you might be having a pretty bad tax problem.
H h how do you know that?
(Man in suit) We are pretty certain that you do have a problem that will show up very soon, so what about that interview again.
I’ll get my coat.

jistincase on January 19, 2012 at 11:18 AM

I love the amazing double standard Newt supporters are using right now. You have to apply your standard of no proof to every facet of the article. With your logic of there being no proof supporting the wife’s statement, thus everything she says is false, we must also apply that to:

Romney directing this
An “establishment” directing this
The Democratic Party directing this
ABC doing this specifically for partisan purposes

If you believe any of those four elements, then you cannot objectively state that Newt’s ex is lying.

Kriggly on January 19, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Its amazing to you because you’re mostly making it up.
Its a strawman.
The majority of people in “defense” of Newt hold the opinion that its old news..repackaged with some holograph stickers on it and the flickering light of a rotating, mirrored disco ball passing over it.
Old news…not “not true” as much as “After 16 years of ruminating about it..I’m going to do it…I’m really going to do it!! ( and they are greasing me pretty goood for it)”

Petty and vindictive. Psychologically bent imo.
How many people reading this blog would do the same thing after 16? years? Most people I know heal..and in a period of time hold no ill will to their ex spouses or partners.

Mimzey on January 19, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Better to do it now early to prevent an Oktober suprise.

antisense on January 19, 2012 at 10:26 AM

The Oktober Surprise is sitting on Nancy Lugosi’s desk..I hear part of it has to do with a tape recording of Newt in 7th grade biology class. He’s muttering something under his breath while dissecting a frog..and then progresses to Newt being a super secret International Man of Mystery.
Its going to be earth shattering.

Mimzey on January 19, 2012 at 11:44 AM

AHHHHHGGGRGGRRRRRRRR

American Dream 246 on January 19, 2012 at 2:48 AM

Let me get this straight. The other woman, who volunteered for the role, is going to be saying some nasty things because she got replaced by the other, other woman?

Speaking of the first wife, am I the only one who’s thinking “what in the heck is a high school teacher doing marrying one of her students right out of high school?”

This Marianne person was not nice even when she and Newt were married and said, even then, she’d go on TV and make sure Newt didn’t become President. See: http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/08/15/marianne-gingrich-more-tales-from-the-marital-crypt/

And Marianne and Newt were SEPARATED for six years. I mean really, folks. If the woman believes in separation what would ever give the husband the notion she had a relationship in mind?

I’m sorry, but this whole thing is yet another bid for attention from the wife who said in interviews she couldn’t play second fiddle to Newt.

This is absolutely a rehash of very very old news and a man who was terribly naive about older women and user women.

Portia46 on January 19, 2012 at 12:12 PM

I think the strategy by the msm is not to bring up anything new, but to work the only thing they have..piss him off. They know that is his weakness, and “getting information out there so people can make an informed decision”, is simply crap. The whole of their efforts from now no will be to piss him off in the hows of creating negative sound bits and video clips.
Thats it.
They will rub and rub until they get a reaction, and then act surprised.
They’re keep pushing into his past and make things up if necessary.
You know…like they did to Obama and John Edwards.

Mimzey on January 19, 2012 at 12:27 PM

They’re keep pushing into his past and make things up if necessary.

Mimzey on January 19, 2012 at 12:27 PM

tztztz, yeah, absolutely despicable, the past of a candidate should be off limits, after all it’s all…in the past, right…

jimver on January 19, 2012 at 12:35 PM

ABC debates the “ethics” of when to release the interview. Really? They have ethics?

The “ex” says she can destroy his career with this interview. There’s a pleasant idea. She really thinks alot of herself – doesn’t she.

rpupton on January 19, 2012 at 12:42 PM

I love the amazing double standard Newt supporters are using right now. You have to apply your standard of no proof to every facet of the article. With your logic of there being no proof supporting the wife’s statement, thus everything she says is false, we must also apply that to:

Romney directing this
An “establishment” directing this
The Democratic Party directing this
ABC doing this specifically for partisan purposes

If you believe any of those four elements, then you cannot objectively state that Newt’s ex is lying.

Kriggly on January 19, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Because Marianne Gingrich has been talking her head off to anyone who’d listen for 25 years. She was trying to destroy Newt when they were married, for heaven’s sake.

Do a tiny bit of research and find out that you’re dealing with a woman who wants total control and is vindictive when she doesn’t get it. She apparently chose separate lives during that 18 years.

Portia46 on January 19, 2012 at 12:43 PM

“Newt cannot beat Obama” – are you out of your mind? Newt is the only candidate who actually shoves this crap in the liberals’ faces. He is plain spoken and is not intimidated. Romney is a vanilla RINO and won’t challenge Obama in any meaningful way. It will be the McCain election all over again. I am FED UP with the so-called Republican elites picking our candidates. Clearly the majority of Republican voters do not want Romney.

Samantha on January 19, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Character matters? Pathetic! You didn’t know about FDR, JFK, LBJ, etc, etc! So what?

What about the Imperial, Narcissistic current WH occupant? Nice character.

rpupton on January 19, 2012 at 1:11 PM

I want you all to remember how pres. clinton’s scandal was handled by the press. We were told it’s his personal life he’s allowed to have to have a personal life. Don’t tell me it’s different. What takes place between 2 people in a marriage is only known to those 2 people.It seems more often than not EXES walk away feeling betrayed and filled with ill-will towards each other.I’m not real fimiliar with Newt’s 3 marriages, but I do remember there was a story released in the press,( which both Newt’s daughters slapped down and proved to be false)that Newt asked his first wife Jackie for a divorce while she was in the hospital . since Marianne was the second Mrs. Gingrich was she the reason for the divorce.I don’t know any of the facts on this,but if this turnsout to be true ,why should I feel sorry or believe her,if she had done the samething to wife #1 As to the question why ABC would do this well they hope this will take Newt down. Thus leaving only Romney who they are certain obama can beat.

pamiam on January 19, 2012 at 1:13 PM

tztztz, yeah, absolutely despicable, the past of a candidate should be off limits, after all it’s all…in the past, right…

jimver on January 19, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Thats a strawman.
I don’t bother much with those.

Mimzey on January 19, 2012 at 1:13 PM

Everything is private and sancrosect in the bedroom, unless we are talking about Republican candidates, right MSM?
Oh no? This is different? Then I expect news soon about Mans Country, and Kal Penn, and Reggie Love, and Donald Young, and who knows what else.
Yeah, that’s what I thought.

quiz1 on January 19, 2012 at 4:32 PM

sacrosanct….I hate my autocorrect

quiz1 on January 19, 2012 at 4:38 PM

Comment pages: 1 12 13 14