Gingrich to Pelosi: “Spit it out!”

posted at 11:00 am on January 25, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Does Nancy Pelosi have the goods on Newt Gingrich? So far, Gingrich doesn’t appear too concerned. When asked by NBC about Pelosi’s warning from last night, Gingrich laughs out loud and advises Pelosi to wake up from her “very strange fantasies” and “spit it out” (via Greg Hengler and Taegan Goddard):

She lives in a San Francisco environment of very strange fantasies and very strange understandings of reality. I have no idea what’s in Nancy Pelosi’s head. If she knows something, I have a simple challenge: Spit it out.

Somehow, I doubt Pelosi will take the bait.  If she actually has something on Gingrich, why play that card now?  Why not wait until he’s the nominee and then drop it on the GOP in the middle of a general election?  If she’s bluffing, Pelosi doesn’t have anything to play anyway.  Don’t expect any expectoration from Pelosi.

Byron York reminds us that Pelosi’s much more likely to be bluffing.  He provides a lengthy review of the ethics case that Pelosi cites, and says that the IRS proved that there wasn’t anything to it — a determination that came too late to help Gingrich:

Nothing happened with the Justice Department and the FBI, but the IRS began an investigation that would stretch over three years.  Unlike many in Congress — and journalists, too — IRS investigators obtained tapes and transcripts of each session during the two years the course was taught at Kennesaw State College in Georgia, as well as videotapes of the third year of the course, taught at nearby Reinhardt College. IRS officials examined every word Gingrich spoke in every class; before investigating the financing and administration of the course, they first sought to determine whether it was in fact educational and whether it served to the political benefit of Gingrich, his political organization, GOPAC, or the Republican Party as a whole.  They then carefully examined the role of the Progress and Freedom Foundation and how it related to Gingrich’s political network.

In the end, in 1999, the IRS released a densely written, highly detailed 74-page report.  The course was, in fact, educational, the IRS said. “The overwhelming number of positions advocated in the course were very broad in nature and often more applicable to individual behavior or behavioral changes in society as a whole than to any ‘political’ action,” investigators wrote. “For example, the lecture on quality was much more directly applicable to individual behavior than political action and would be difficult to attempt to categorize in political terms. Another example is the lecture on personal strength where again the focus was on individual behavior. In fact, this lecture placed some focus on the personal strength of individual Democrats who likely would not agree with Mr. Gingrich on his political views expressed in forums outside his Renewing American Civilization course teaching. Even in the lectures that had a partial focus on broadly defined changes in political activity, such as less government and government regulation, there was also a strong emphasis on changes in personal behavior and non-political changes in society as a whole.”

The IRS also checked out the evaluations written by students who completed the course. The overwhelming majority of students, according to the report, believed that Gingrich knew his material, was an interesting speaker, and was open to alternate points of view. None seemed to perceive a particular political message. “Most students,” the IRS noted, “said that they would apply the course material to improve their own lives in such areas as family, friendships, career, and citizenship.”

The IRS concluded the course simply was not political.  “The central problem in arguing that the Progress and Freedom Foundation provided more than incidental private benefit to Mr. Gingrich, GOPAC, and other Republican entities,” the IRS wrote, “was that the content of the ‘Renewing American Civilization’ course was educational…and not biased toward any of those who were supposed to be benefited.”

The bottom line: Gingrich acted properly and violated no laws.  There was no tax fraud scheme. Of course, by that time, Gingrich was out of office, widely presumed to be guilty of something, and his career in politics was (seemingly) over.

Read it all, and it’s pretty easy to determine that Pelosi’s bluffing.  If Democrats had anything that explosive against Gingrich, they would have deployed it at the time.


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 2 3

Anyone know if John King is hosting Thursday’s CNN debate again? If he is, Newt better watch out and know what’s coming. King will be licking his chops to exact revenge of Newt.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see a lot more dirty tricks trying to knock down Newt. The thing with silencing the audience was just the beginning. I’m guessing the next thing they’ll try is to take away or limit Newt’s chances to respond…they’ll probably throw nothing but softball questions at him, so Newt won’t get a chance to have those “moments”.

tkyang99 on January 25, 2012 at 1:10 PM

Will some PAC please produce a spoof-Video where Jimmy Fallon Gingrich explains to Baby Obama why tax cuts are like cashback bonuses– and (according to research) everyone likes more money… well, almost everyone.

please?

Terp Mole on January 25, 2012 at 1:11 PM

The Left and Obama fear Gingrich more than the devil.

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2012 at 12:44 PM
The Left doesn’t fear the devil, they embrace the devil.

Gingrich does scare the crap out of them, however.

MisterElephant on January 25, 2012 at 1:11 PM

“One of these days we’ll have a conversation about Newt Gingrich,” Pelosi said at the time. “When the time is right. … I know a lot about him. I served on the investigative committee that investigated him, four of us locked in a room in an undisclosed location for a year. A thousand pages of his stuff.”
In the end, a single paper submitted by Newts attorney that had inaccurate information on it, while several other documents gave the accurate information and Newts verbal testomony also gave the correct information on it was construed by the panel to constitute an ethics violation. Out of a thousand pages, one in error, think the public will find that to be unethical? Dream on Romney prinicples supporters. You are swinging at windmills.

astonerii on January 25, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Finally! A Republican candidate who, instead of getting on defense and sputtering with intimidation, laughs out loud, calls Nancy Pelosi out for the loony left-winger that she is, and tells her to put up or shut up.

I like Newt.

GMO on January 25, 2012 at 1:17 PM

Believe me.

Al-Ozarka on January 25, 2012 at 11:09 AM

I’m not sure what happened to her, but she has become shrill, and she needs to get off her constant level of outrage. Not only would she demonize Reagan as a big-government, crony-capitalist, liberal-in-sheep’s clothing, but you could cross Reagan with Goldwater, William F. Buckley, and Rush Limbaugh, and she’d still find more wrong than right.
DRayRaven on January 25, 2012 at 11:25 AM

And, have you seen her “demonize” Reagan? At any time? I didn’t think so.
It looks more like you and al ozark are just blowin’ smoke up each other’s butt.

Solaratov on January 25, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Here’s more significant stuff on Romney plans.

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2012 at 1:19 PM

And now Pelosi’s office is coming out saying she has no damaging info on Gingrich at all.

Didn’t we already do this exact same thing once before? Pelosi has lost her mind.

mitchellvii on January 25, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Politically or otherwise, I think the man is not worthy of my trust.

JohnGalt23 on January 25, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Then just go ahead and vote for obama. Go on – you know you want to. In the interests of “bi-partisanship”.
Talk about your ‘American Idol/Jerry Springer voters. Ha! You exemplify that.

Solaratov on January 25, 2012 at 1:26 PM

mitchellvii on January 25, 2012 at 1:23 PM

I think we have to pass her threat in order to see what’s in it.

Eren on January 25, 2012 at 1:29 PM

Newt, you can kiss all those San Francisco votes goodbye.

timberline on January 25, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Ew-w-w-w-w. No. You don’t know what you’re likely to catch.

Solaratov on January 25, 2012 at 1:30 PM

I love how Gingrich just says “I don’t know” when asked if Pelosi could know something. He’s got so much junk in the closet he has no clue if she’s found out about some of it or not.

Talk about a total disaster…

Swerve22 on January 25, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Spit it out.” No, Nancy swallows.

rjulio on January 25, 2012 at 12:51 PM

I’ve seen pictures of Nanzi in her younger days, and, even way back then, she was as awkward, gangling and goofy as she is now.

In a word: yick!

Solaratov on January 25, 2012 at 1:26 PM

“John Galt,” my backside. It’s just another lame libtard troll posing as a conservative.

MisterElephant on January 25, 2012 at 1:31 PM

Finally, someone with the cajones to stand up to that loud mouthed broad! AND the media too, all within a week’s time. Talk about a fantasyland.

scalleywag on January 25, 2012 at 1:34 PM

And now Pelosi’s office is coming out saying she has no damaging info on Gingrich at all.

Didn’t we already do this exact same thing once before? Pelosi has lost her mind.

mitchellvii on January 25, 2012 at 1:23 PM

Slight correction – one must possess something in order to lose it.

Jim M. on January 25, 2012 at 1:38 PM

Thank you for your honesty, if there is nothing to hide Newt should have been happy to get it into the public record.

Tater Salad on January 25, 2012 at 11:40 AM

And just how do you put “NOTHING” into the public record?

Pelosi made the charge/threat. It’s up to Pelosi to “put it into the public record”.

Solaratov on January 25, 2012 at 1:40 PM

http://bigjournalism.com/jjmnolte/2012/01/24/nbcs-brian-williams-intentionally-drains-excitement-out-of-last-nights-debate/
Pelosi is trying to do the same thing that Brian Williams did at the NBC debate. Stop the enthusiasm, stop the excitement, stop the electricity and the energy. And to do that…you have to stop Newt.
(link courtesy of PatriotGal2257 from one of yesterdays threads)

lynncgb on January 25, 2012 at 1:40 PM

“Help me, Nancy Pelosi, you’re my only hope!”

-Princess Mittens Romgana

mankai on January 25, 2012 at 1:41 PM

The Left and Obama fear Gingrich more than the devil.

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2012 at 12:44 PM

This…

… They know he will actually hold them down, pull out a pair of pliers, and forcibly remove them from the government tite!

Hang in there Newt…!

Seven Percent Solution on January 25, 2012 at 1:41 PM

meanwhile Romney decides to run with this.In doing this he has aligned himself IMHO with one of the three worst dems.in gov.definitly a true conservative’s nightmare. Reminded me again why I should give up my beliefs,principles,values,to vote this guy in. I’m sure he’ll put Pelosi in her place once he’s in office. He won’t stab me in the back again? RIGHT??RIGHT?? I don’t think she has anything,I think she’s pulling a Herman Cain.Get people wondering,doubting Newt loses th FL Primary Then he loses financial support loses votes and has to drop out .mission accomplished. If she does have something the sooner she drops it the better for her side she gets rid of Newt now.Instead she she has the gall to try her hand at coercion. Romney has no problem with this? Well I do. This is a game-changing move. I was willing to fall on my sword yet again no matter who got the nomination Perry was my guy. Pelosi is where I draw the line. I will vote for any of the other 3 should they get the nod,if Romney gets it I will do a write in. If Romney should lose against obama lay the blame where it belongs Romney and his campaign,no one else

pamiam on January 25, 2012 at 1:42 PM

I hate conspiracy theories, but I distrust her so much and feel she does whatever is best for her party, that it doesn’t seem much of a stretch to believe this is her plan.

csdeven on January 25, 2012 at 12:55 PM

I guarantee she’s not that deep of a thinker. She just proved again that’s she’s a lying skank, no better than a howler monkey flinging poo. But, she’s devious, not clever.

Harbingeing on January 25, 2012 at 1:45 PM

Pelosi has been warned about using information learned in ethics hearings. Newt thought he had scared her. She has now figured how to let someone else make the revelation, but is too stupid to quit talking about it.

borntoraisehogs on January 25, 2012 at 1:48 PM

Amen, Tates.

btw, San Fran Nan must have some dirt on Newt, and it will get out. The only questions are, who will leak, who will break it, and when.

shinty on January 25, 2012 at 11:48 AM

Ho. The truth is that you HOPE that she has some dirt.

Solaratov on January 25, 2012 at 1:49 PM

Thinly veiled blackmail and the withholding of campaign support moneys are the ways Pelosi has ascended from the street-brawling days of political favors in Baltimore to the halls of the House.

There should be an investigation of the many ways that Pelosi’s legislative career enriched her own purse under the pretense of doing the people’s work, selfless altruist that she is. Heh!

onlineanalyst on January 25, 2012 at 1:49 PM

No…….

Solaratov on January 25, 2012 at 1:49 PM

Pelosi isn’t skeleton free either, I’m sure. Question though to anyone who has a quess. Why are the Democrats expending the big ammo before our primaries are even over? Seems like it would be smarter to wait until one is nominated and then attack when it’s to late.

smoothsailing on January 25, 2012 at 1:55 PM

I have to laugh when liberals whine about how republicans are ruining political discourse at the exact same time the leadership of their own party engages in this kind of political blackmail. The hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Scrappy on January 25, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Uh, no. Many of the GOP congressional delegation is behind Gingrich.
JohnGalt23 on January 25, 2012 at 12:37 PM

Irrelevant.

And for those who aren’t, they would certainly have to have leadership behind them if they want a career in DC after possibly getting tossed out of the House.

No they wouldn’t. Gingrich was repudiated by his own party, had a long-running (and certainly debatable) DC career following his resignation, and is now one primary away from from being the media-touted frontrunner for his party’s nomination for President.

Besides, if the leak crushes Gingrich, resulting in Romney’s nomination and election, the GOP leadership will move against the guy who made Romney president?

Leaking is only a losing proposition if Romney loses the nomination or the election. Of which the Romney camp is no longer certain. Hypothetically, that could explain why he’s holding back.

Far more likely, he’s got nothing, because no one has anything. Certainly not Nancy.

de rigueur on January 25, 2012 at 1:59 PM

New thread. Nancy has nada.

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Read it all, and it’s pretty easy to determine that Pelosi’s bluffing.

That’s assuming the only dirt on Newt is to be found in the ethics violations. It’s not as if sex scandals are unheard of in DC and Newt does have some baggage in that area. Longtime DC insiders are likely well-versed in the “unaired who was doing whom” dept and it’s also not unheard for such insiders to leak damaging info.

whatcat on January 25, 2012 at 2:11 PM

Clearly from Gingrich’s own comments there is some sort of record that is out there, the last time Nancy brought this up he threatened her with breaking the law for releasing sealed records.

Tater Salad on January 25, 2012 at 11:36 AM

Or perhaps Newt was reminding Pelosi a lesson about ethics.

onlineanalyst on January 25, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Solaratov on January 25, 2012 at 1:40 PM

You’re dealing with an idiot troll. Don’t waste your breath.

MisterElephant on January 25, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Breaking News:

Pelosi just admitted she doesn’t have anything on Newt.

Night Owl on January 25, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Is Pelosi really that stupid?

She is inviting a flood of opposition researchers snooping around her business interests in Napa Valley & Marin. Any undocumented, illegal immigrant with a criminal record can pick grapes or wash dishes.

MichaelGabriel on January 25, 2012 at 12:51 PM

The use of illegal alien labor doesn’t hurt democratics, in fact it probably helps them. Empathy and all that. Better to look for environmental abuses, or product fraud.

slickwillie2001 on January 25, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Nazi p swallows, she can’t spit anything out
He he

angrymike on January 25, 2012 at 2:28 PM

I am so sorry I just couldn’t help myself.

angrymike on January 25, 2012 at 2:30 PM

I think we did this before, once before when Nancy Pelosi threatened someone with information she had no legal right to disclose.

She can say things like this anytime, and you won’t know if she really has something to disclose, or is pretending.

Ignore Nancy Pelosi.

But first, lets look at her income tax returns and, like Diane Sawyer said about Mitt’s income, let’s see how we can spend her millions.

I don’t remember Diane Sawyer ever saying that about Nancy…or John Kerry…or the Kennedy’s or…John Corzine, Obama’s right hand man on things financial…ooops

Fleuries on January 25, 2012 at 2:32 PM

This still doesn’t give me the warm fuzzies. Pelosi could have found out something else about Newt, that had nothing to do with the ethics violations charges, during the investigation.

Sorry guys but Newt is arrogant enough to dare her to reveal what she has on him, even knowing that something’s there that will be a game changer should it come out.

daddysgirl on January 25, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Sorry guys but Newt is arrogant enough to dare her to reveal what she has on him, even knowing that something’s there that will be a game changer should it come out.

daddysgirl on January 25, 2012 at 2:39 PM

What you said is falling on deaf ears here at Hot Gas, but thanks for getting it out there anyways.

scotash on January 25, 2012 at 2:48 PM

This still doesn’t give me the warm fuzzies. Pelosi could have found out something else about Newt,
daddysgirl on January 25, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Pelosi has you spooked, which is all she is trying to accomplish.

lynncgb on January 25, 2012 at 3:14 PM

New thread. Nancy has nada.

Schadenfreude on January 25, 2012 at 2:04 PM

She never had anything to begin with. Every time she speaks she has even less.

Bmore on January 25, 2012 at 3:33 PM

I am convinced that some political supporters will throw anyone who shares their ideology under the bus if they criticize their candidate, and it is those spineless cowards that keep giving us these crappy choices every four years.

MadisonConservative on January 25, 2012 at 11:40 AM

Thanks for the reinforcement of my point about MM, MC!

Al-Ozarka on January 25, 2012 at 3:39 PM

Pelosi has you spooked, which is all she is trying to accomplish.

lynncgb on January 25, 2012 at 3:14 PM

I admit she does have me spooked. She’s an evil woman but not a dumb one (I don’t think). This is twice now that she’s said she has something on Newt only to have her staff say she doesn’t. I’m afraid that after awhile we won’t believe her and then someone (she) will release something that is devastating. Maybe I’m overanalyzing. It comes with having no candidate in the field that I trust.

daddysgirl on January 25, 2012 at 3:56 PM

daddysgirl on January 25, 2012 at 3:56 PM

Newt, because of his background, is an easy target when it comes to this type of scare tactic. I believe many of his supporters here at HA (including myself) have decided to accept the risks that he comes with and take that leap of faith. Do we wonder if we’re wrong? Of course. But I would wonder if I was wrong if I was a Romney, Santorum or Paul supporter too. I agree with my candidates vision (for the most part) and trust his ability to follow through and make it a reality. Standing strong through the troubles that all campaigns must deal with, is actually just standing strong for what you truly believe in… no matter what comes along.

lynncgb on January 25, 2012 at 8:24 PM

Newt, because of his background, is an easy target when it comes to this type of scare tactic. I believe many of his supporters here at HA (including myself) have decided to accept the risks that he comes with and take that leap of faith. Do we wonder if we’re wrong? Of course. But I would wonder if I was wrong if I was a Romney, Santorum or Paul supporter too. I agree with my candidates vision (for the most part) and trust his ability to follow through and make it a reality. Standing strong through the troubles that all campaigns must deal with, is actually just standing strong for what you truly believe in… no matter what comes along.

lynncgb on January 25, 2012 at 8:24 PM

Excellent points. Thank you.

My concern was that she might have something on him that is so vile that I couldn’t live with myself if I voted for him and by the time it came out I wouldn’t have a choice. I’ve had time to think it through now. Panic attack over….:)

Bummer that we have such flawed candidates this time. I don’t usually second guess myself.

daddysgirl on January 25, 2012 at 11:26 PM

Disgusting .. Really are you serious ?
She eats out of that mouth?Y

MrMoe on January 27, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3