PDA

View Full Version : Nancy Pelosi provides Newt Gingrich ethics report




Wyle
12-06-2011, 01:05 PM
http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2011/12/06/nancy-pelosi-provides-newt-gingrich-ethics-report/?tsp=1



wonder how much dirt the media will dig up after reading that thing.

Aratus
12-06-2011, 01:12 PM
she delivered?
she had said
she would!

HOLLYWOOD
12-06-2011, 01:14 PM
Sending it Social...

SilentBull
12-06-2011, 01:15 PM
Not sure it will matter. The moron Republicans will justify it because it came from Pelosi. No one cares about corruption and the issues. They will justify anything to match what they want to believe, and right now they want to believe Newt is a conservative and the answer to our problems.

PauliticsPolitics
12-06-2011, 01:18 PM
Only 1280 pages!
Anyone want to pay me to read it all?

RonPaulCult
12-06-2011, 01:20 PM
Only 1280 pages!
Anyone want to pay me to read it all?

Honestly - we should divide it up and all read this thing - posting anything interesting to this thread.

I'll take the first 20 pages.

Dr.3D
12-06-2011, 01:20 PM
Only 1280 pages!
Anyone want to pay me to read it all?

Better pay a Senator or Congressman for that.

Errr... never mind.

freejack
12-06-2011, 01:24 PM
Thanks for some light reading during my lunch break.

braane
12-06-2011, 01:25 PM
Will the Republicans care...that is the question. If they do, then this is one of those battleship sinkers, otherwise nothing will change. Also...Bachmann is on Fox News and they have been talking about her all day... guess who is about to get her second chance? UGH

Aratus
12-06-2011, 01:34 PM
newt + ethics = oxymoron

take thy time, its worth it.

Ranger29860
12-06-2011, 01:35 PM
If I am reading this right. It states (atleast in the section i am reading) that Gingrich had knowingly gave the ethic commitie false information.

*edit*

Page 92 of part 1 last paragraph is pretty bad

Stevo_Chill
12-06-2011, 01:39 PM
If I am reading this right. It states (atleast in the section i am reading) that Gingrich had knowingly gave the ethic commitie false information.

*edit*

Page 92 of part 1 last paragraph is pretty bad

perjury to a congressional inquiry is a felony.

SpiritOf1776_J4
12-06-2011, 01:40 PM
Dang, that was just one of his many scandals too.

Ranger29860
12-06-2011, 01:41 PM
perjury to a congressional inquiry is a felony.

He paid a 300k fine nd recieved a reprimand from what i can tell. They couldn't prove absolutely that he did this knowingly so they couldn't hit him with perjury.. But they call him either a liar or a moron which is noce :)

PastaRocket848
12-06-2011, 01:42 PM
i swear it's almost like they make those things impossibly long and boring to read on purpose.

Karsten
12-06-2011, 01:42 PM
Not sure it will matter. The moron Republicans will justify it because it came from Pelosi. No one cares about corruption and the issues. They will justify anything to match what they want to believe, and right now they want to believe Newt is a conservative and the answer to our problems.
Well the Cain stuff mattered eventually, even though they tried to pass it off as a Democratic plot.

Karsten
12-06-2011, 01:43 PM
But I did think she was going to wait until the nomination. I mean why bring it out now and ruin his chance to be a bad general election candidate?

brushfire
12-06-2011, 01:43 PM
http://ethics.house.gov/committee-report/matter-representative-newt-gingrich

Student Of Paulism
12-06-2011, 01:50 PM
i swear it's almost like they make those things impossibly long and boring to read on purpose.

LMao, tell me about it. I had to stop, it is just down right mind numbing.

It is more long winded than a Tom Clancy novel, sheesh.

Ranger29860
12-06-2011, 01:56 PM
LMao, tell me about it. I had to stop, it is just down right mind numbing.

It is more long winded than a Tom Clancy novel, sheesh.

Section 9 is where you want to start its the anaylis and conclussion of the investigation. THe rest is beuricratic fluff

Original_Intent
12-06-2011, 01:56 PM
She came out with it now so that the official word will be that the Dems are a-scared of The Newt and The Donald, so obviously they are the ones that a good GOP person will support.

"Please Brer Fox, don't throw me in that briar patch!!!"

Nirvikalpa
12-06-2011, 01:59 PM
The topic of interest is government relations. How can "we" (individuals and corporations) make a difference in the
legislative process? What is the outlook for corporations or specifically the foodservice industry during this administration? What good can PAC's do in the legislative process? I would suggest a breakfast meeting approximately one hour in length on November 9th or 11th. However, we are flexible.

p. 768, prt 3.


The Clinton budget request proposed a 40% cut in federal prison construction.
The Drug Czar's office was slashed 84%.
A member of the Clinton administration proposed studying drug legalization.
The Clinton administration has announced a drastic cutback on drug interdiction.
The Clinton administration is undermining mandatory minimum sentences and opposes new mandatory minimums for use or possession of firearms by criminals.
The Clinton administration's Deputy Solicitor General was Chief Counsel to a presidential commission that recommended abolishing all Federal and State child pornography laws.
The recent Justice Department brief weakens anti-child pornography enforcement.
The Clinton administration opposes the death penalty for drug kingpins.
The Clinton administration favors even more appeals and more delays in executing the death penalty.
No matter what President Clinton says in the State of the Union, what his administration does is undermining law and order and making things easier for criminals.

p. 869 prt 3

PauliticsPolitics
12-06-2011, 02:00 PM
Yea, after reading a bunch of this report, I can conclude that Newt did some very bad things: Like, almost felony-bad.
However, this report is mostly smart people stuff.
I don't believe that the people who are blindly falling behind Newt are of the "smart people" variety.
I don't think this will get any traction, sadly.

PastaRocket848
12-06-2011, 02:28 PM
it depends on what politico does with it. if anyone does anything, it'll be them.

unknown
12-06-2011, 02:35 PM
Honestly - we should divide it up and all read this thing - posting anything interesting to this thread.

I'll take the first 20 pages.

I was thinking the same thing. Im thinkin at this point our time is probbaly better spent calling but I'll definitely do some when I can.

I think it may helpful to list the specific page numbers though 1-20 is obvious.

Brian4Liberty
12-06-2011, 02:51 PM
Gingrich said that would be foul play and promised to retaliate, claiming Pelosi was threatening to disclose non-public information.

http://blog.sfgate.com/nov05election/2011/12/06/nancy-pelosi-provides-newt-gingrich-ethics-report/?tsp=1

What is Gingrich afraid of? As if the known scandals are not bad enough, it appears that there is plenty more dirt in there. No doubt the kind that many of these politicians share.

Nancy: "You brought the coke Newt!"
Newt: "Well, you brought the hookers Nancy!"
Nancy: "Yeah, and I video taped you too!"
Newt: "And I have tape of you too, Nancy!"

Liberty4life
12-06-2011, 03:03 PM
This smells like a vendetta, she has been sitting on this for a while, you know it smells.
I don't really think she would care less if it lost her party the election.

Stevo_Chill
12-06-2011, 05:41 PM
//

CableNewsJunkie
12-06-2011, 05:52 PM
Opportunity coming up soon on CNN:

Congressman Peter King will explain why Gingrich is not the guy for him.

This is an opportunity to foment division within the neoconservative ranks.