General discussion

Newt lecturing DeLay on ethics?

Hines: If Newt is warning DeLay about ethics, times are bad .
(Chronicle login: semods4@yahoo.com; pw = speakeasy)

>>"Republicans in the House have to look at the reality that if we make sense as a party right now it's because we are the reform party, and anything that risks being the reform party is more dangerous for us than it is for the Democrats," Gingrich told a journalists' breakfast Tuesday sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor. "They should be very careful."

DeLay, sometimes through House Speaker Dennis Hastert, has since exacted revenge against the House Ethics Committee for repeatedly citing him.

As a result of subsequent changes in House rules, it is now harder to institute an ethics complaint against a member. Hastert also replaced the fair-minded chairman of the House ethics committee, Joel Hefley, R-Colo., with a leadership stooge, Rep. Richard "Doc" Hastings, R-Wash., and replaced two of the Republicans on the panel. Two of the newly appointed members, including Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio, have been contributors to DeLay's legal defense fund.

If DeLay's message was not clear enough, Hastings fired the two long-serving senior committee staff members, who were, in effect, the panel's institutional memory.

"The Republican Party's majority comes from the Perot voters who want real reform," Gingrich said. "Anything which weakens that is difficult."

The replacement of Hefley and the staff firings are "a fait accompli," Gingrich judged. "But as they move toward the future they should be careful about understanding that to the degree that we are seen as no longer the reform party, we create space either for a third party or for people to just stay home. And both are dangerous for our majority."<<

Apparently he dismisses the possibility that moderates will become as fed up with Republican Party arrogance and abuses as they did when they bought the lies in the Contract on America, most of whose provisions were never operative, while the rest are long-abandoned now that the abuses benefit Republicans rather than Democrats.

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Discussion is locked

Follow
Reply to: Newt lecturing DeLay on ethics?
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: Newt lecturing DeLay on ethics?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Comments
- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Coming soon: Relationship advice from Ike Turner
- Collapse -
Oh for a good third choice, too bad won't happen.
the possibility that moderates will become as fed up with Republican Party arrogance and abuses

Because I don't see either national party head committee as doing anything for me or the nation honestly.

Both party national committees are as more about power hunger than anything else, peroid.

JMO

Roger

click here to email semods4@yahoo.com
- Collapse -
Newt

Of course reading the introductory line of the article clearly states where the writer is going. I have to admit that I have never listened to Newt until recently. Both parties have people that some would rather be more quiet. But I heard him speak his thoughts about our educational system in the US, how we got to our position of advantage, how we are losing it, and what we need to do to regain it. He was promoting his book, "Winning the Future". I listened cynically at first. It might be easy to pick apart a few specifics but, on the whole, I thought it was worth a listen. He's obviously a person with some intelligence. There have been many who get dismissed as being too bizarre in their forward thinking....and many of these we have rued not giving an ear to. I'm no fan or foe of Newts but I the interview I heard was worth the listen IMO.

- Collapse -
Did he have any good

compassion in marriage tips?

Dan

- Collapse -
Or maybe some tax advice?

Did Newt ever repay that bailout loan from Bob Dole?

- Collapse -
Looks like ...
- Collapse -
But a p.s. ...

... IRS clears Newt Gingrich's college course

... After considering the matter for three and a half years, the IRS issued a "technical advice memorandum" finding no violation of tax laws in the use of a tax-exempt entity to sponsor Gingrich's course, "Renewing American Civilization."

Gingrich began the course in 1993, before Republicans won control of the House and made him speaker. Gingrich's lectures were videotaped and widely distributed.

Democrats said it was a campaign gimmick and filed ethics complaints accusing him of illegal use of tax-exempt funds for political purposes. A tax expert hired by the House Ethics Committee said the course violated tax laws, and in 1997 Gingrich agreed to pay a $300,000 fine for making misleading statements to the ethics panel and failing to seek better legal advice before using tax-exempt money for the course.

As it turned out, the course was legal after all...


He should have his record cleared as well, and the 300,000 fine returned.

This should be the last time this is brought up against Newt, but as history has demonstrated, facts and resolutions of such things rarely get in the way where some are concerned.

"This audit took too long and cost too much," he said.

Now where have I heard that before when in the end crimes were committed!

Evie Happy

- Collapse -
I agree....

....that if the course was determined to be legal, that Newt should have the amount of the fine returned to him. However I think Bob Dole is still entitled to the interest on his loan, being that the money probably would have been earning interest for him if he hadn't lent it to Newt. Whether Newt would have a case against the IRS (to recover the interest, being that he wouldn't have had to borrow the money in the first place if the IRS had ruled sooner) is a legal question I wouldn't know how to answer.

...as history has demonstrated, facts and resolutions of such things rarely get in the way where some are concerned.

That's true. For example, no evidence of wrongdoing was found in the Whitewater real estate investment (after all that time and money spent investigating it), yet you can bet it will be raised as a campaign issue if Hillary runs in '08.

Wink

- Collapse -
Didn't Web Hubbell ...

... and others get convicted and go to jail? I could be mistaken. What would rightly come up for Hillary is more along the lines of those Rose Law Firm records and her little stock market bonanza. Also some of the shenanigans of her 2000 Senate campaign.

Hoping Jeannine Pirro -- Westchester County DA -- runs against her for the Senate. She's well enough known to make a good run for it.

As to the loan, I agree, Dole is owed the interest, and I don't think Congress should have to pay it, but they should return the fine.

Evie Happy

- Collapse -
Yes, others were found to have done wrong

But not either of the Clintons. But I'll betcha any amound of money that if she runs, the "scandal" will be dredged up in such a way as to make it sound like they were criminals despite the fact that even Ken Starr couldn't come up with any evidence that they did anything wrong.

I don't think her little stock market bonanza is any worse than that little cash-out of Bush's (Harkin). I'd bet they both got some inside info.

- Collapse -
nevermind

I thought it was a political joke...... Happy

CNET Forums

Forum Info