New Romney ad: Let Tom Brokaw tell you about Newt’s ethics

posted at 1:36 pm on January 28, 2012 by Allahpundit

Watch this one while you can because Brokaw and NBC are, apparently, “extremely uncomfortable” with it.

In a statement Saturday, former NBC “Nightly News” anchor Tom Brokaw, who is featured in the ad reporting on Gingrich’s 1997 ethics investigation, said, “I am extremely uncomfortable with the extended use of my personal image in this political ad. I do not want my role as a journalist compromised for political gain by any campaign.”…

The NBC legal department has written a letter to the campaign asking for the removal of all NBC News material from their campaign ads. Similar requests have gone out to other campaigns that NBC says have inappropriately used clips from “Nightly News,” “Meet the Press,” “Today” and MSNBC material.

Wouldn’t surprise me if Team Mitt used the Brokaw footage in the full expectation that NBC would raise a stink. They used the same strategy a few months ago, I suspect, in that ad taking Obama out of context on the economy. They knew the left would flip out and, in so doing, increase the ad’s exposure; it’s “earned media” in the most cynically earned way. This ad is doubly clever insofar as it uses an, ahem, impartial newsman to lay out the “facts” of Gingrich’s ethics reprimand in the House. That’s an effective counter to Newt’s complaints that Romney is distorting what happened in that ethics saga — after all, we’ve got fair-and-balanced Tom Brokaw reporting on it right here — but of course, there is some distortion happening: As Byron York explained in a post a few days ago, Gingrich was ultimately exonerated of any illegality after an investigation by Bill Clinton’s IRS. (See the second clip below.) Doesn’t change the fact of the House reprimand but it does call into question whether it was warranted.

Too bad there are no more debates before Tuesday. Newt could have packaged this spot plus Romney’s defense of John King into a fine little rant about cozying up to the “elite media.” Exit question via Johnny Dollar: Since when does NBC News or its subsidiaries object to promoting certain politicians?

Update: The NYT has an interesting piece today about Team Mitt’s use of Twitter to take the pulse of Republican reaction to developments in the campaign. Here’s their newest step, another aspect of their “Newt is totally unelectable” messaging: “Romney’s campaign also debuted a new Twitter hashtag to accompany the [Brokaw] television spot: #Newtorious.”


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 4 5 7

If Republicans would go after BHO and the rest of the Dems, like they are going after Newt, they’d take the house, senate and presidency, in a landslide.

Norky on January 28, 2012 at 2:40 PM

I think Newt needs to run an ad with Pam Bondi saying Mitt wants Romneycare in every state.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/01/were-screwed-florida-ag-pam-bondi-claims-mitt-wants-romneycare-in-every-state-video/

saspepper on January 28, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Romney can take on Obama because Romney is a smiling cobra.

gerrym51 on January 28, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Smiling cobra or sewer rat. At any rate, it may be why Romney has such a sucky record at winning elections.

ddrintn on January 28, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Watching these two sling it out with each other is downright hilarious. What would be even funnier is if Santorum or Paul wins the nomination because the other two completely covered each other in so much mud/BS they couldn’t see what was going on around them.

TQM38a on January 28, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Florida has plenty of seniors who watched and respected Brokaw, even with political differences. Greatest and Silent Generations.

This was brilliant on Romney’s part. Piss of NBC and Newt at the same time. The more Newt is pissed off, the more ridiculous he becomes.

haner on January 28, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Whats so great about Gingrich? No one can really say it seems.

Signed,

A member of the anyone but Gingrich movement.

Zybalto on January 28, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Was pivotal in taking back the House after 50+ years of Democrat dominance? Contract with America? Welfare Reform?

Any of these ring a bell?

You don’t have to like the guy; you don’t have to support the guy; but at least acknowledge what he has done to advance the conservative agenda.

Snorkdoodle Whizbang on January 28, 2012 at 2:40 PM

All I hear around here is how Mitt can’t stand up to Obama…

BettyRuth on January 28, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Betty, you are totally missing the point. Mitt may be able to stand up to Obama, but his principles and ideas and past actions will cause him to wither.

NOMOBO on January 28, 2012 at 2:41 PM

It looks to me like all of this banter ignores the facts of the case. True, Gingrich was exonerated against the accusations of tax fraud; but not for lying during the investigation. That was the final charge that did stick after all. Remember, Gingrich said wrt Clinton, that is wasn’t the sex, it was the lyin’. In this case it looks like it wasn’t the tax, it was still lyin’.

Alma on January 28, 2012 at 2:41 PM

I know, right? I’m not understanding all this weeping and wailing from the Newtist colony when they’re supposed to be “the fighters” in this primary. They don’t have as much of an appetite for it as they were claiming last week.

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 2:32 PM

Yep, the whining and crybaby stuff about it being “too negative” combined with the “Newt’s a victim of the Establishment” complaints is eye-opening. Whatever Romney throws at Newt, Obama will do 100 times more. The good thing about Newt is that he is toughening and helping to sharpen the Romney campaign.

Look, if Romney wins the nomination, Obama will try to make the campaign about fairness and raising taxes on the rich. Romney will make it about a failed presidency, jobs, and the economy.

If Newt wins the nomination, Obama will amplify all these attacks and make it about Newt the Reckless Extremist. Newt will try to make it about Obama the Socialist and Newt’s grandiose ideas.

Romney is in the better position to win the general.

pearson on January 28, 2012 at 2:42 PM

This is very unfair of Mitt. If the moonie gets the nomination, there is NO WAY that Obama will bring up that the moonie is the only speaker in the history of the country to be reprimanded. No way would Obama bring up that fact.

Jailbreak on January 28, 2012 at 2:42 PM

If any of you Romney supporters think that Romney will go after Obama like this.Then you are living in a dream world.He will not even now dare call Obama a socialist.He keeps saying Obama is a nice guy that just misguided .

logman1 on January 28, 2012 at 2:38 PM

You just don’t get it. Newsflash: Romney has said nice things about Newty, too. He’s probably at one point even said that Newty was a “nice guy.” So…what’s your point?

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 2:42 PM

With the notable exception of J. William Bottomtooth, Romney-bots remain too intellectually bankrupt and empty-headed to answer Professor Sowell’s salient question.

Thomas Sowell: “Can you name one important positive thing that Romney accomplished as governor of Massachusetts? Can anyone?“

…anyone? Beuhler? Beuhler?

*crickets chirp*

Terp Mole on January 28, 2012 at 2:43 PM

philwynk on January 28, 2012 at 2:35 PM

That isn’t true. The letter presented to the committee was reviewed and signed by Gingrich. Later evidence was presented that Gingrich admitted that GOPAC had been involved in the beginning. The lie raised the question as to WHY Gingrich tried to hide GOPACS involvement if he was absolutely positive that he was completely compliant with ethical and legal standards. It is clear that Gingrich was intent on pushing the GOPAC agenda through the course, but in a way that he would have plausible deniability.

They had Gingrich by the shorties and he had to admit the lie and accept the $300K fee as part of the reprimand.

csdeven on January 28, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Gee, what a surprise – RINO romney(care) is getting help from his pals in the socialist media. Who could of guessed that that would happen ?

TeaPartyNation on January 28, 2012 at 2:44 PM

If any of you Romney supporters think that Romney will go after Obama like this.Then you are living in a dream world.He will not even now dare call Obama a socialist.He keeps saying Obama is a nice guy that just misguided .

logman1 on January 28, 2012 at 2:38 PM

This is such a lame argument. Romney doesn’t have to call Obama a socialist to go after him. I know it’s what a lot of folks on the right want, but it tells voters nothing. Nothing! Obama has high personal likability. Voters like him. They want to vote for him as the incumbent. They need some good reasons not to. Romney will tell people precisely what it is that Obama has done to destroy this nation, and he’ll call him a name voters understand: a failure. And the failure will be because of his disastrous policies, not because he’s a “bad, bad man.” It is just wrong to think that Obama can be beat by making voters hate him as much as we do. That isn’t going to happen. But they’ll vote against him — even while they like him — if they understand that he has failed as their president.

Rational Thought on January 28, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Smiling cobra or sewer rat. At any rate, it may be why Romney has such a sucky record at winning elections.

ddrintn on January 28, 2012 at 2:40 PM

Right. Meanwhile, Sarah Palin couldnt get Miller elected in her home state of Alaska where she is more unpopular than the president. Why didnt your heroine run for president? Because she is unelectable…unlike President Romney.

Jailbreak on January 28, 2012 at 2:44 PM

It will be ‘fun’ after the primaries.

Schadenfreude on January 28, 2012 at 2:31 PM

I’ll take the quote marks as meaning the same as the /sarc tag.

It will only be fun if the Republican base manages to avoid McCain-Rerun Romney and run a conservative with some balls to oppose Obama. I’d be happy with Gingrich, Santorum, Bachmann, Ryan, Palin, or somebody yet unnamed. What will happen if we run Romney will be painful. I’m not sure who first floated his “electability,” but I’m pretty sure it’s somebody with a reason to want a 2nd Obama term.

philwynk on January 28, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Things Mitt will ATTEMPT to do if elected.

1.repeal obamacare
2. replace obamacare with some reforms.
3. basically use paul ryans medicare support plan
4. make adjustments to SS based on cpi change,age raisings,means testing.
5.apply
bain capital management techniques to downsizing and merging cabinet depts.
6.strenghten navy,air force,downsize army/marines

and because of this Probably NOT get re-elected

gerrym51 on January 28, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Too bad there are no more debates before Tuesday. Newt could have packaged this spot plus Romney’s defense of John King into a fine little rant about cozying up to the “elite media.” Exit question via Johnny Dollar: Since when does NBC News or its subsidiaries object to promoting certain politicians?

With the debates a month away, Romney is going for the kill. Newt is impotent without the free media of debates.

haner on January 28, 2012 at 2:45 PM

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/01/were-screwed-florida-ag-pam-bondi-claims-mitt-wants-romneycare-in-every-state-video/

Sparky5253 on January 28, 2012 at 1:46 PM

I sent that link into tips. I’d like to hear the Romney supporters respond to the Florida AG acknowledging Romney wants ROMNEYCARE in every state and he’s asked her to be on his healthcare board. There’s video, and you can’t deny that she’s said. (click the link) conservative pilgrim on January 28, 2012 at 1:56 PM

You should have listened to the video first. Bondi did not say Romney wants ROMNEYCARE in every state. Quite the opposite.

Basilsbest on January 28, 2012 at 2:45 PM

Was pivotal in taking back the House after 50+ years of Democrat dominance? Contract with America? Welfare Reform?

Snorkdoodle Whizbang on January 28, 2012 at 2:40 PM

And then he bungled the ’98 elections.

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Thomas Sowell: “Can you name one important positive thing that Romney accomplished as governor of Massachusetts? Can anyone?“

When you consider the poor choices that remain from the GOP, it’s not really an issue of getting behind any of them (they all suck). It’s an issue of figuring which one will most likely get Obama out of there.

pearson on January 28, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Question why is Romney hitting Newt so hard a few days before the primary.According to all the polls Romney is 8% to 10% ahead of Newt.Could it be the whisperers coming out of Fla.that Santorum did so well in the debate that he has taken about 6 to 8 points away not from Newt but Romney.Oh My.

logman1 on January 28, 2012 at 2:47 PM

You should have listened to the video first. Bondi did not say Romney wants ROMNEYCARE in every state. Quite the opposite.

Basilsbest on January 28, 2012 at 2:45 PM

You’re never going to convince these people.

Count on them also to ignore the fact that Bondi is fighting tooth and nail to defeat Obamacare in the courts, which would make a fifty-state endorsement of Romneycare just a little uncharacteristic.

KingGold on January 28, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Hmmm, maybe because he was America’s anchorman for a decade? You may know his political leanings, but I guarantee the majority of America does not.

Also, using the whole mittbots thing, lame.

kmalkows on January 28, 2012 at 2:33 PM

this a GOP primary. All of the primary voters know Brokaw is a liberal all that is except Mitt’s team. this isn’t a general election campaign. You Mittbuttboys are clueless.

unseen on January 28, 2012 at 2:48 PM

cicerone: And then he bungled the ’98 elections was lynched by RINOs who gave us Milktoast Hastert

FTFY

Terp Mole on January 28, 2012 at 2:48 PM

He will not even now dare call Obama a socialist.

logman1 on January 28, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Because calling the POTUS naughty names for self edification is a loser with a president that has HUGE personal likeability polling on his side. Our nominee, whomever it will be, had better go after Obama on policies and results and leave the petty name calling to people who like the childish school yard taunts as their preferred way to prove their status as the adult in the room.

csdeven on January 28, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Question why is Romney hitting Newt so hard a few days before the primary.According to all the polls Romney is 8% to 10% ahead of Newt.Could it be the whisperers coming out of Fla.that Santorum did so well in the debate that he has taken about 6 to 8 points away not from Newt but Romney.Oh My.

logman1 on January 28, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Aren’t you the idiot who predicted the Ras poll on Thursday would have Newt up by 8? Instead he was down by 8.

haner on January 28, 2012 at 2:49 PM

NBC = Al Jazeera. Feh!

Philly on January 28, 2012 at 2:49 PM

and because of this Probably NOT get re-elected

gerrym51 on January 28, 2012 at 2:44 PM

If he accomplishes all of that, he won’t need to be. He’ll have saved the country.

KingGold on January 28, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Betty, you are totally missing the point. Mitt may be able to stand up to Obama, but his principles and ideas and past actions will cause him to wither.

NOMOBO on January 28, 2012 at 2:41 PM

Well, I think you’re wrong. I’ve already seen how many indies and moderates he appeals to; It’s just the hard right conservatives that are having a problem with him and most of them seem to think being “right” is better than beating Obama. I don’t.

BettyRuth on January 28, 2012 at 2:51 PM

pearson moaned: (they all suck)

Well, there’s a winning campaign theme.

They all suckvote Romney!

/

Terp Mole on January 28, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Because calling the POTUS naughty names for self edification is a loser with a president that has HUGE personal likeability polling on his side. Our nominee, whomever it will be, had better go after Obama on policies and results and leave the petty name calling to people who like the childish school yard taunts as their preferred way to prove their status as the adult in the room.

csdeven on January 28, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Well said. Calling him a socialist also does not tell voters anything. What does that mean??!! The emphasis from Romney will be where it should be: on what Obama has done. He’ll be illustrating that Obama is a socialist, which will be a lot more powerful than petty name-calling.

Rational Thought on January 28, 2012 at 2:51 PM

That may be so. Then why isn’t Romney 10 points ahead of Gingrich?

cozmo on January 28, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Considering Romney has one win and two second place finishes and Gingrich has one win and two dismal 4th and 5th place finishes, Romney’s plan is working out pretty well.

csdeven on January 28, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Question why is Romney hitting Newt so hard a few days before the primary.According to all the polls Romney is 8% to 10% ahead of Newt.Could it be the whisperers coming out of Fla.that Santorum did so well in the debate that he has taken about 6 to 8 points away not from Newt but Romney.Oh My.

logman1 on January 28, 2012 at 2:47 PM

I doubt this. He’s just trying to run up the score. Florida is the first primary that is most reflective of the country at large. If Newt loses by double digits after the SC win, and after 2 more debates, it’s hard to see how he can win anywhere else.

pearson on January 28, 2012 at 2:51 PM

“I think Barack Obama is actually a pretty good person. I think he’s a good father, I think he has good intentions, but I think he’s in way over his head.”

-Mitt Romney

Now he uses liberal Tom Brokejaw to go after Newt.

Romneycare in all 50 states=Obamacare. Will vote Libertarian before supporting this commie.

Valiant on January 28, 2012 at 2:52 PM

You should have listened to the video first. Bondi did not say Romney wants ROMNEYCARE in every state. Quite the opposite.

Basilsbest on January 28, 2012 at 2:45 PM

I watched and it sure sounds like she/he would push for it

KBird on January 28, 2012 at 2:52 PM

…anyone? Beuhler? Beuhler?

*crickets chirp*

Terp Mole on January 28, 2012 at 2:43 PM

Was that one where the guy attempted to apologize for Newt’s lack of character?

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 2:52 PM

You should have listened to the video first. Bondi did not say Romney wants ROMNEYCARE in every state. Quite the opposite.

Basilsbest on January 28, 2012 at 2:45 PM

But if you say it often enough, and post it on EVERY thread, maybe the Newtrons can wish it to be so.

BettyRuth on January 28, 2012 at 2:53 PM

Florida has plenty of seniors who watched and respected Brokaw, even with political differences. Greatest and Silent Generations.

This was brilliant on Romney’s part. Piss of NBC and Newt at the same time. The more Newt is pissed off, the more ridiculous he becomes.

haner on January 28, 2012 at 2:40 PM

those are dems

the senoiors in FL who are republican are Reagan Republicians who can’t stand Brokaw. stupid move on Mitt’s part. Yet another clue to show Mitt doesn’t understand the republican base.

unseen on January 28, 2012 at 2:53 PM

there is NO WAY that Obama will bring up that the moonie is the only speaker in the history of the country to be reprimanded. No way would Obama bring up that fact.

I agree, there’s no way Obama would bring it up himself, but his supporters would.

Whatever Romney throws at Newt, Obama will do 100 times more.

Again, I don’t think Obama himself will get anywhere as down and dirty and personal as we’ve seen in the primary. I don’t know what people’s recollection of previous general elections were, but the candidates themselves don’t tend to get this dirty or personal, for fear of not seeming “Presidential”.

tkyang99 on January 28, 2012 at 2:53 PM

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/01/were-screwed-florida-ag-pam-bondi-claims-mitt-wants-romneycare-in-every-state-video/

Sparky5253 on January 28, 2012 at 1:46 PM

Thats it, I am definitely sitting out this election if Romney gets the nomination. No matter who wins, Romney or Obama, we are thoroughly screwed.

eva3071 on January 28, 2012 at 2:53 PM

Romney will not win Florida.

Key West Reader on January 28, 2012 at 2:39 PM

Can you justify that comment or are you going to just click your heels three times until it comes true? I prefer the former if you please.

csdeven on January 28, 2012 at 2:53 PM

Ugh. More Mitt Sh*t in my mailbox today. All these fancy glossy pooper scoopers. He should use his money more wisely IMHO.

Key West Reader on January 28, 2012 at 2:54 PM

NOMOBO on January 28, 2012 at 2:41 PM

They know this because he did a fabulous job of standing up to John McCain and Ted Kennedy.

/

Eren on January 28, 2012 at 2:54 PM

“I think Barack Obama Newt Gingrich is actually a pretty good person. I think he’s a good father, I think he has good intentions, but I think he’s in way over his head.”

-Mitt Romney

Valiant on January 28, 2012 at 2:52 PM

So what’s your point?

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 2:54 PM

I doubt this. He’s just trying to run up the score. Florida is the first primary that is most reflective of the country at large. If Newt loses by double digits after the SC win, and after 2 more debates, it’s hard to see how he can win anywhere else.

pearson on January 28, 2012 at 2:51 PM

And Newt’s team will huddle with Romney’s team, they’ll offer Newt a prime-time speaking slot at the convention, Romney will probably offer him something in a Romney Administration, and Newt will play patty-cake with Mitt until November. If Newt jumps on board, will the Newties here?

Rational Thought on January 28, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Micheal morre? or that rich. Hey you want to defend vulture capitalism like Bain capital who only exists because of the tax code dreamed up by the gop establishment and the dmes go ahead. knock yourself out. The reason the majority of americans hates wall street is because of firms like Bain capital. they are the pimple on the as* of capitalism and give the entire system a bad name. Without the Bain capitals of the world capitalism wouldn’t be under such great assult in the world today.

unseen on January 28, 2012 at 2:33 PM

You sound like a Daily Kos poster. The reason the majority of Americans hates Wall Street is the inflammatory rhetoric from folks like your boy Newt, who use class envy to bludgeon those who have more than others. That’s the Michael Moore playbook, and it’s exactly what Newt (and Palin) have decided to buy into. Sad, that.

changer1701 on January 28, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Question why is Romney hitting Newt so hard a few days before the primary.According to all the polls Romney is 8% to 10% ahead of Newt.Could it be the whisperers coming out of Fla.that Santorum did so well in the debate that he has taken about 6 to 8 points away not from Newt but Romney.Oh My.

logman1 on January 28, 2012 at 2:47 PM

plus the last straw poll where a klittle known pizza CEO beat the crap out of Mitt as well as the memory of Mitt’s massive defeat in 2008 that saw the end of his campaign. As McCain the moderate cruched Mitt the liberal in FL.

unseen on January 28, 2012 at 2:55 PM

Rational Thought on January 28, 2012 at 2:44 PM

You beat me to it. Your assessment is 100% correct!

csdeven on January 28, 2012 at 2:56 PM

That isn’t true. The letter presented to the committee was reviewed and signed by Gingrich. Later evidence was presented that Gingrich admitted that GOPAC had been involved in the beginning. The lie raised the question as to WHY Gingrich tried to hide GOPACS involvement if he was absolutely positive that he was completely compliant with ethical and legal standards. It is clear that Gingrich was intent on pushing the GOPAC agenda through the course, but in a way that he would have plausible deniability.

They had Gingrich by the shorties and he had to admit the lie and accept the $300K fee as part of the reprimand.

csdeven on January 28, 2012 at 2:43 PM

That this was anything other than a transparent ploy to destroy someone who had triumphed over the Democrats in Congress and backed a Democrat President into a corner is a true stretch of the imagination. In the final analysis, after FOUR YEARS of desperately trying, they had NOTHING left to spank Gingrich with, and if they had, believe me when I say that they would have JOYFULLY trumpeted it to the rooftops. As it was, Gingrich’s exoneration was barely covered by the MSM. Someone, anyone, please show me video of Brokaw announcing that little fact. I am well aware that you are a fervent Mitt Romney supporter as well as his fellow Mormon, but to stubbornly persist in trying to build this up into something that it wasn’t diminishes your credibility. Although you dutifully step into the fray to defend Mitt on an almost daily basis, I’ve yet to see you finding “plausbile deniability” for his specific flip-flops and pandering in Massachusetts on abortion, the gay rights agenda, gun control, etc. As someone who would characterize myself as EXTREMELY conservative, those issues are important to me and I would NEVER, NEVER vote for someone who is in favor of any of them. Rather than try to tear Newt down with a false premise, why don’t you stick to helping your fellow conservatives understand why we should believe that Mitt is telling the truth now, because frankly, I don’t believe him.

Ethics Committee Drops Last of 84 Charges Against Gingrich
By Curt Anderson
Associated Press
Sunday, October 11, 1998; Page A13
The House ethics committee dropped the three remaining ethics charges against Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) yesterday, despite finding that Gingrich repeatedly violated one rule by using a political consultant to develop the Republican legislative agenda.

The ethics panel decided to take no further action because there is no evidence that “Rule 45″ violations are continuing in the speaker’s office, a post Gingrich has held since 1995. Consultant Jeffrey Eisenach’s work took place while Gingrich was the GOP minority whip in 1990-91.Gingrich was elected speaker after Republicans took control of the House.

“The committee believes you have been adequately informed and cautioned on Rule 45 issues and anticipates full compliance in the future,” said Rep. James V. Hansen (R-Utah), the panel’s chairman, and Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) in a letter to Gingrich.

The committee decision came near the close of the House session as lawmakers hurried to clear languishing business and return to their districts to campaign for next month’s election.

Eisenach was a paid consultant to GOPAC, a Republican political group formerly chaired by Gingrich, according to the letter.

Gingrich is paying $300,000 for the costs of an ethics committee investigation after admitting last year he made inaccurate statements during a lengthy probe into Democratic allegations that he misused tax-exempt donations. Gingrich denied the charges but submitted to a reprimand by the House.

In a brief interview, Gingrich said he felt a “big sense of relief” now that the four-year investigation is over.

“It ends a chapter. Let’s go on to other things,” he said.

The speaker’s office issued a statement noting that yesterday’s dismissal of the last three charges means that 83 of the 84 ethics allegations filed by Democrats have been dropped.

The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, as the ethics panel is formally known, also decided to defer to a federal judge’s decision to dismiss an allegation that GOPAC improperly subsidized Gingrich’s 1990 reelection campaign.

U.S. District Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer in 1996 threw out a Federal Elections Commission lawsuit contending that GOPAC broke election laws by assisting federal candidates and not making its donor lists and spending reports public.

The ethics panel was “persuaded by the court’s findings” that the laws were not violated, Hansen and Berman wrote.

“It appears to us that to the extent that GOPAC was exonerated by the court, you are by implication exonerated as well,” they wrote to Gingrich.

A third allegation that Gingrich benefited personally from $250,000 in GOPAC “Newt Support” and should have reported it as income for federal tax purposes was also dropped by the ethics committee for lack of evidence.

cynccook on January 28, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Thats it, I am definitely sitting out this election if Romney gets the nomination. No matter who wins, Romney or Obama, we are thoroughly screwed.

eva3071 on January 28, 2012 at 2:53 PM

Another “true conservative” warrior showing her true colors. I thought the Newtists were “fighters.”

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Can you justify that comment or are you going to just click your heels three times until it comes true? I prefer the former if you please.

csdeven on January 28, 2012 at 2:53 PM

You’ll just have to wait until Tuesday.

Key West Reader on January 28, 2012 at 2:56 PM

( haner)If you want to get down and dirty and starting name calling let me know.I have a long list of words that will fit you to a tee.The poll was right i just read it wrong and apologize to all later that night.

logman1 on January 28, 2012 at 2:57 PM

You should have listened to the video first. Bondi did not say Romney wants ROMNEYCARE in every state. Quite the opposite.

Basilsbest on January 28, 2012 at 2:45 PM

No, she just lied through her teeth. RomneyCare didn’t overrun its budget? Won’t raise taxes? Won’t create new bureaucracy? Doesn’t reduce choices? I live in Massachusetts, and I will tell you flat-out: she is LYING on every point. RomneyCare in Massachusetts is a disaster, over budget, forcing tax increases, creating intractable bureaucracy, forcing nearly every insurer out of the state with draconian regulation, robbing everybody of any legitimate choice. You can’t even find a goddam primary care physician if you’re on any form of state insurance, which is about half the damn state.

The only item on which she was not 180 degrees off the mark is that Romney’s plan wouldn’t divert money from Medicare. That’s a reason to vote AGAINST Mitt Romney, because the funding deficit in Medicare is two or three times the size of the funding deficit in Social Security, and any plan that does not include fundamental changes in Medicare is a plan to allow the dollar to collapse.

philwynk on January 28, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Well, there’s a winning campaign theme.

They all suck… vote Romney!

/

Terp Mole on January 28, 2012 at 2:51 PM

Well……they do.

Question for Newt fans: If you like Newt so much, why did you not support from the start? It looks to me that for many Newt fans, he is their second or third choice by now. So if he wins it all, are you SURE you want him to define conservatism from now on? Are you really ready to defend him for 4 years?

pearson on January 28, 2012 at 2:57 PM

You sound like a Daily Kos poster. The reason the majority of Americans hates Wall Street is the inflammatory rhetoric from folks like your boy Newt, who use class envy to bludgeon those who have more than others. That’s the Michael Moore playbook, and it’s exactly what Newt (and Palin) have decided to buy into. Sad, that.

changer1701 on January 28, 2012 at 2:54 PM

Oh so your reply is the people are stupid. They just don’t get it? the reality is the people understand perfectly what is going on. They understand leveraged buyouts and the dismantling of companies and shipping jobs to China. Keep on defending the indefensible and see how many states Obama wins this time. Reagan knew enough not to go down that road.

unseen on January 28, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Smiling cobra or sewer rat. At any rate, it may be why Romney has such a sucky record at winning elections.

ddrintn on January 28, 2012 at 2:40 PM

My vote is for sewer rat. What a scumball. If he gets the presidency, he’ll screw over the conservatives in a heartbeat. Belee dat.

Conservchik on January 28, 2012 at 2:58 PM

plus the last straw poll where a klittle known pizza CEO beat the crap out of Mitt as well as the memory of Mitt’s massive defeat in 2008 that saw the end of his campaign. As McCain the moderate cruched Mitt the liberal in FL.

unseen on January 28, 2012 at 2:55 PM

How’s the view from high atop the Tower of Babble-on?

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 2:58 PM

I just joined this thread so if this has already been posted, my apologies.

NBC News asks Romney Campaign to Remove Ad

Flora Duh on January 28, 2012 at 2:58 PM

Belee dat.

Conservchik on January 28, 2012 at 2:58 PM

LMAO! Sure…

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 3:00 PM

The line got a huge laugh from the crowd of several hundred people who turned out to see Romney stump with Voight, as well as Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell and Sen. John McCain, who entertained the crowd with his own stand-up routine while introducing Romney.

The Arizona senator, who trained as a pilot at the naval base in Pensacola, joked that the money he spent as a young bachelor in the city had single-handedly kept the city’s economy alive. And, in a repeat of a line he often repeated on the presidential campaign trail here four years ago, McCain joked about Zsa Zsa Gabor’s sex life.

Noting the other dignitaries on hand, McCain said, “I feel a bit like Zsa Zsa Gabor’s fifth husband. I know what I’m supposed to do, but I don’t know how to make it interesting.”

A few feet away, Romney let out an awkward giggle.“I thought we only brought one actor and comedian here today,” Romney told McCain when it was his turn at the mic. “Gosh, that was quite a repartee there, senator. That was fabulous.”

Well with those kind of endorsements, how can Romney lose?

cynccook on January 28, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Question for Newt fans: If you like Newt so much, why did you not support from the start?

pearson on January 28, 2012 at 2:57 PM

I did. He’s been the best thinker in the Republican party for the last 10 years.

philwynk on January 28, 2012 at 3:00 PM

“I think Barack Obama is actually a pretty good person. I think he’s a good father, I think he has good intentions, but I think he’s in way over his head.”

-Mitt Romney

Valiant on January 28, 2012 at 2:52 PM

I am really astonished that people here cannot see how devastating the kind of attack above will be to Barack Obama. Mitt is infantilizing him, describing him as a benign child, a hapless albeit affable incompetent. “Gosh, Obama wanted to be a good president, but he just wasn’t up to the job. It’s the kind of job that takes a real grown-up.” This is the kind of ridicule that gets under Obama’s skin far more than being called names. With name calling, he gets his lines like “They treat me like a dog,” and people who like him get defensive on his behalf. With the kinds of attacks like those above, his only defense is to prove he isn’t incompetent — and he cannot do that.

Rational Thought on January 28, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Willard and his MittWits are in for a cruel awakening this fall.

Mittens attempts to “go aggressive” against BHO will be turned against him by the media elites. The media will relentlessly portray him as a 1%/er, plutocrat who is the spawn of polygamists. Have fun while you can Willard!

vilebody on January 28, 2012 at 3:00 PM

There isn’t a god-damn difference between Romney and Obama when it comes to healthcare.

eva3071 on January 28, 2012 at 3:01 PM

Question why is Romney hitting Newt so hard a few days before the primary.According to all the polls Romney is 8% to 10% ahead of Newt.Could it be the whisperers coming out of Fla.that Santorum did so well in the debate that he has taken about 6 to 8 points away not from Newt but Romney.Oh My.

logman1 on January 28, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Could be this.

RepubChica on January 28, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Newt is a crap sandwich. Romney is a commie crap sandwich. Pick your poison.

Valiant on January 28, 2012 at 3:02 PM

I just joined this thread so if this has already been posted, my apologies.

NBC News asks Romney Campaign to Remove Ad

Flora Duh on January 28, 2012 at 2:58 PM

His strategy is going to backfire, big time. Word on the ground is either Newt or Santorum. Very little support for Mitt in the I-4 corridor.

Key West Reader on January 28, 2012 at 3:02 PM

I just joined this thread so if this has already been posted, my apologies.

NBC News asks Romney Campaign to Remove Ad

Flora Duh on January 28, 2012 at 2:58 PM

As I’ve said before, the Left and their media allies want Newty to get the nomination. So it’s not surprising that NBC and Brokaw are embarrassed that their own words might now be used to hurt Newty’s chances. You don’t seriously think that they want to face Romney, do you? Come on…

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Another “true conservative” warrior showing her true colors. I thought the Newtists were “fighters.”

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 2:56 PM

I will never vote for someone whose supposed ‘principles’ are the opposite of mine. I am waiting to be convinced that Romney has truly ‘seen the light’ and magically become a conservative Republican. I have a much easier time believing that Newt is finished screwing around on his spouse than I do believing that Mitt is not going to screw Republicans who vote for him. I will never vote for someone who is not pro-life. Never.

cynccook on January 28, 2012 at 3:03 PM

He’ll be illustrating that Obama is a socialist, which will be a lot more powerful than petty name-calling.

Rational Thought on January 28, 2012 at 2:51 PM

He’ll make comparisons to Obama’s vision for America and the policies used in socialist countries. It will be devastatingly effective.

csdeven on January 28, 2012 at 3:04 PM

His strategy is going to backfire, big time. Word on the ground is either Newt or Santorum. Very little support for Mitt in the I-4 corridor.

Key West Reader on January 28, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Word on the ground, huh? What message are the clouds in the sky sending you?

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Question for Newt fans: If you like Newt so much, why did you not support from the start?

pearson on January 28, 2012 at 2:57 PM

We’re not Newt fans. We’re anti-Romneyites, and have been so from the start of this campaign.

I am really astonished that people here cannot see how devastating the kind of attack above will be to Barack Obama. Mitt is infantilizing him, describing him as a benign child, a hapless albeit affable incompetent.

Rational Thought on January 28, 2012 at 3:00 PM

Oh, yeah. I’m sure Obama is still reeling from the blow.

ddrintn on January 28, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Could be this.

RepubChica on January 28, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Yup.

Key West Reader on January 28, 2012 at 3:04 PM

Another “true conservative” warrior showing her true colors. I thought the Newtists were “fighters.”

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 2:56 PM

Fight against what and who with. Your God-King has already made it quite clear that he can do without the conservative vote so I say go get them. Just that I am not keen on voting out Obama to replace him with a guy that will be even worse.

eva3071 on January 28, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Sorry, can’t “take your word for it.” Romney wants to win. Rational Thought on January 28, 2012 at 2:26 PM

And that’s just about all he wants. That’s the problem. And he won’t do so. ddrintn on January 28, 2012 at 2:28 PM

Don’t you ever get tired of posting such stupid comments. Romney is a brilliant problem solver. He thinks he can solve the problems of the country he loves. He’s spent millions trying to be President. Pretending that he’s in it just to win is clueless. He doesn’t covet public adulation. Quite the opposite. He’s quite humble – for such a brilliant man.

Basilsbest on January 28, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Newt is a crap sandwich. Romney is a commie crap sandwich. Pick your poison.

Valiant on January 28, 2012 at 3:02 PM

With all of his well-documented foibles, has Newt ever done anything to make you truly doubt that he is pro-life, pro-Second Amendment, pro-welfare reform, pro-sanctity of marriage, etc., etc.?

cynccook on January 28, 2012 at 3:05 PM

I will never vote for someone who is not pro-life. Never.

cynccook on January 28, 2012 at 3:03 PM

Then good news! Since Romney IS pro-life you can vote for him. Problem solved.

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Word on the ground, huh? What message are the clouds in the sky sending you?

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 3:04 PM

I live here, okay? We didn’t want Mitt in 2008 and we don’t want him now. Just wait until Tuesday and you’ll see what we’re talking about.

Key West Reader on January 28, 2012 at 3:06 PM

With all of his well-documented foibles, has Newt ever done anything to make you truly doubt that he is pro-life, pro-Second Amendment, pro-welfare reform, pro-sanctity of marriage, etc., etc.?

cynccook on January 28, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Did you really just go there? LMAO!!!!

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 3:07 PM

His strategy is going to backfire, big time. Word on the ground is either Newt or Santorum. Very little support for Mitt in the I-4 corridor.

Key West Reader on January 28, 2012 at 3:02 PM

Did you see this news-press poll released yesterday afternoon?

Poll: Gingrich, Romney in dead heat statewide

Flora Duh on January 28, 2012 at 3:08 PM

Then good news! Since Romney IS pro-life you can vote for him. Problem solved.

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Until he is not, again…

eva3071 on January 28, 2012 at 3:08 PM

Then good news! Since Romney IS pro-life you can vote for him. Problem solved.

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 3:06 PM

News Flash! I think he’s full of crap! I’ve seen one too many clips of him in the recent past vehemently advocating “a woman’s right to choose!” I don’t believe his oh-so conveniently timed epiphany because I think he’s just saying that to get my vote!

cynccook on January 28, 2012 at 3:08 PM

I live here, okay? We didn’t want Mitt in 2008 and we don’t want him now. Just wait until Tuesday and you’ll see what we’re talking about.

Key West Reader on January 28, 2012 at 3:06 PM

And yet your impeccable sources can’t say whether it will be Gingrich or Santorum who will win? Please.

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 3:09 PM

the senoiors in FL who are republican are Reagan Republicians

unseen on January 28, 2012 at 2:53 PM

You always stop short. These folks remember what an anathema Gingrich was to the Reagan movement at the end. His narcissism created the greatest mid term loss by the non incumbent party in decades. So instead of keeping it going, he stopped it dead in it’s tracks after just four years. And then there was the admission of lying and the fine of $300K to reimburse those self same Americans for the money it cost them to investigate his corrupt @ss.

csdeven on January 28, 2012 at 3:09 PM

Did you really just go there? LMAO!!!!

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 3:07 PM

Great rebuttal. So you have hours of footage of him trying to out-liberal Ted Kennedy, et al.? I’d love to see them.

cynccook on January 28, 2012 at 3:09 PM

I live here, okay? We didn’t want Mitt in 2008 and we don’t want him now. Just wait until Tuesday and you’ll see what we’re talking about.

Key West Reader on January 28, 2012 at 3:06 PM

If anyone other than Romney wins on Tuesday there’s going to be a Mittbot Meltdown like you wouldn’t believe.

ddrintn on January 28, 2012 at 3:09 PM

News Flash! I think he’s full of crap! I’ve seen one too many clips of him in the recent past vehemently advocating “a woman’s right to choose!” I don’t believe his oh-so conveniently timed epiphany because I think he’s just saying that to get my vote!

cynccook on January 28, 2012 at 3:08 PM

I’m sorry you don’t want to believe the truth. It’s still a free country, so go right ahead.

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 3:10 PM

Romeycare is bankrupting his state.

cynccook on January 28, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Newt is a loose cannon FDR statist at heart but can articulate conservatism and govern that way for 100 days- 100 days more than we’ll get out of the likes of Willard.

Valiant on January 28, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Did you see this news-press poll released yesterday afternoon?

Poll: Gingrich, Romney in dead heat statewide

Flora Duh on January 28, 2012 at 3:08 PM

You betcha. Newt has the Tea Party and all of the 9-12 groups.

Mitt is going to lose on Tuesday.

Key West Reader on January 28, 2012 at 3:11 PM

He thinks he can solve the problems of the country he loves.

Basilsbest on January 28, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Well then he’s a f***ing lunatic.

ddrintn on January 28, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Oh so your reply is the people are stupid. They just don’t get it? the reality is the people understand perfectly what is going on. They understand leveraged buyouts and the dismantling of companies and shipping jobs to China. Keep on defending the indefensible and see how many states Obama wins this time. Reagan knew enough not to go down that road.

unseen on January 28, 2012 at 2:58 PM

I didn’t say anyone was stupid, but I do believe too many have bought into the class resentment propaganda that insists that someone is rich due to ill-gotten gains. You’re a perfect example, twisting what a company like Bain does into some nefarious scheme to kill American jobs while enriching others. You don’t seem to understand that other companies they helped thrived, that those who invested did so under tremendous risk, with the possibility of tremendous reward. That is how private enterprise works, and no amount of phony populism or sanctimonious screeching about the nebulous establishment changes that.

changer1701 on January 28, 2012 at 3:11 PM

Great rebuttal. So you have hours of footage of him trying to out-liberal Ted Kennedy, et al.? I’d love to see them.

cynccook on January 28, 2012 at 3:09 PM

I’m sorry…still laughing at the idea that Newty is the champion of marriage. Here’s my rebuttal: It’s not about QUANTITY…

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 3:12 PM

If anyone other than Romney wins on Tuesday there’s going to be a Mittbot Meltdown like you wouldn’t believe.

ddrintn on January 28, 2012 at 3:09 PM

Will it be similar to the whining and hand-wringing from Newt fans after Thursday’s debate? Or, you know, whenever anything remotely critical of him is posted?

changer1701 on January 28, 2012 at 3:14 PM

I didn’t say anyone was stupid, but I do believe too many have bought into the class resentment propaganda that insists that someone is rich due to ill-gotten gains.

changer1701 on January 28, 2012 at 3:11 PM

No, most of us are saying that being rich or being the son of the president of AMC or being president of Bain Capital aren’t in themsleves qualifications to be president.

ddrintn on January 28, 2012 at 3:14 PM

It looks to me like all of this banter ignores the facts of the case. True, Gingrich was exonerated against the accusations of tax fraud; but not for lying during the investigation. That was the final charge that did stick after all. Remember, Gingrich said wrt Clinton, that is wasn’t the sex, it was the lyin’. In this case it looks like it wasn’t the tax, it was still lyin’.

Alma on January 28, 2012 at 2:41 PM

I’ll defer to Bryan York on this one, since he covered the case at the time:

Gingrich also admitted that he had provided “inaccurate, incomplete, and unreliable” information to Ethics Committee investigators. That “inaccurate” information was Gingrich’s contention that the course was not political — a claim Cole and the committee did not accept, but the IRS later would.


So it would appear that what you’ve called ‘lyin’, most people would call ‘not agreeing with the false premise of the charge you’re defending yourself against’. I don’t know about you, but I know which version of due process I’d prefer. You really should give the article a read… it’s really quite illuminating.

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/what-really-happened-gingrich-ethics-case/336051

Snorkdoodle Whizbang on January 28, 2012 at 3:15 PM

I’m sorry you don’t want to believe the truth. It’s still a free country, so go right ahead.

cicerone on January 28, 2012 at 3:10 PM

Just telling me “that’s the truth” is hardly a convincing argument. I would love to rally around someone at this point, and in so many ways, Romney could fit the bill. But he doesn’t. Maybe abortion, gay marriage, Second amendment rights, etc. aren’t important issues to you, but they are to me. And pretty much the last time I checked, they comprised the platform of our party. It amazes me that Mitt’s base of 25% can’t see how the rest of us remain skeptical of him.

cynccook on January 28, 2012 at 3:16 PM

Will it be similar to the whining and hand-wringing from Newt fans after Thursday’s debate?

changer1701 on January 28, 2012 at 3:14 PM

I didn’t see much handwringing from the NotRomneys.

ddrintn on January 28, 2012 at 3:16 PM

As someone who would characterize myself as EXTREMELY conservative, those issues are important to me and I would NEVER, NEVER vote for someone who is in favor of any of them.

cynccook on January 28, 2012 at 2:56 PM

So why are you supporting Gingrich? He supports amnesty, supported Romneycare and also the federal mandate. And he has already proven that he cannot be trusted. Trust is the first tenet in the conservative resume. He lied to his wives. Lied to congress. Lies that he is a “historian”. And lied again a week ago about witnesses he never provided to ABC. When you add to that his long history of erratic behavior, Gingrich is the worst possible candidate to take on Obama.

csdeven on January 28, 2012 at 3:16 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 7