Newt: I didn't resign in disgrace

[Amelia]

On Hannity Newt said that he didn't resign in disgrace from the congress.

WTFlock?

How does he back up that claim? I guess it depends on what the meaning of "is" is. I mean what the meaning of "disgrace" is.





Okay, this is my last "Oh God not Newt" thread for the day. I think. I'll try to hold back until tomorrow.

 

[BlindBoo]

That's right, he resign as speaker of the House of the House after the first reprimand of a Speaker in 208 years. But not a desgrace.......

The House voted overwhelmingly yesterday to reprimand House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) and order him to pay an unprecedented $300,000 penalty, the first time in the House's 208-year history it has disciplined a speaker for ethical wrongdoing.


The ethics case and its resolution leave Gingrich with little leeway for future personal controversies, House Republicans said. Exactly one month before yesterday's vote, Gingrich admitted that he brought discredit to the House and broke its rules by failing to ensure that financing for two projects would not violate federal tax law and by giving the House ethics committee false information.

Washingtonpost.com: House Reprimands, Penalizes Speaker

 

[Truthseeker420]

I agree with Newt. How do you disgarace a party that has no shame?

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Right, and he was never a lobbyist either, and Clinton never inhaled, and Nixon was not a crook.

 

[California Girl]

I can't tell you how relieved I am to hear that.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

And he wasn't fined $300K and didn't get blow jobs in the parking lot so he could say he was faithful and didn't get thrown out of his church because the church was supporting his wife and kids.

My all time fave was him saying that Calista was a non-demanding Chevy while Marianne was a Jaguar.

He's a loose cannon who thinks he can bully his way into or out of anything. Watching him in the debates has been a real education. When he doesn't want to address a question, he just starts huffing and puffing.

Speaking of puffing, he really looks like shit. Very fat and puffy and poor color. Y'all better take a good look at who he picks as his running mate ...

(Not that he has a chance!)

 

[Avorysuds]

I think this whole thing is funny as shit. I like watching the Republican party implode by pushing for one of the most Progressive liberals the Republican party has ever had. It's amazing to watch Newt flip flop near daily.

If you think Newt will own Obama in a debate then you have a serious inability to separate yourself from bias. On almost every big issue that Newt would attack Obama on Obama can thank Newt for fighting for 10-20 years to help make the programs/policies possible.

Have you guys seen what happens when Newt gets caught in a lie? He breaks charecter and laffs at himself, then he keeps lying....

Good luck Neocons, still pushing for Government you can't afford.

 

[candycorn]

Right, and he was never a lobbyist either, and Clinton never inhaled, and Nixon was not a crook.

Was that before or after Gore invented the Internet? LOL

 

[code1211]

On Hannity Newt said that he didn't resign in disgrace from the congress.

WTFlock?

How does he back up that claim? I guess it depends on what the meaning of "is" is. I mean what the meaning of "disgrace" is.





Okay, this is my last "Oh God not Newt" thread for the day. I think. I'll try to hold back until tomorrow.

Did you forget what was gong on then? Newt was taking down their guy and they decided to take newt down.

All but one of the ethics violations were dismissed as there was no proof of them. They were fabrications. They were lies. That's all they were.

There were 84 allegations in all and 83 were summarily dropped. The 84th was on its face inaccurate as it charged that something that occurred 4 years before Newt became speaker occurred while he was speaker.

The question of what "is" is pertains to Clinton. The question of how to eliminate a political foe is what this illustrates and it smears the Democrats more than it smears Newt.

When the facts are there to find, why do you spread lies instead?



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/govt/leadership/stories/101198.htm

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.

 

[Oddball]

I agree with Newt. How do you disgarace a party that has no shame?

I dunno...Go ask Clintoon, John Edwards, Anthony Weiner, war profiteer Dianne Frankenstein, insider trader and compulsive liar Nancy Pelosi, and report back your results.

 

[AmericanFirst]

I agree with Newt. How do you disgarace a party that has no shame?

Yeah, dimwits are shameless.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[del]

On Hannity Newt said that he didn't resign in disgrace from the congress.

WTFlock?

How does he back up that claim? I guess it depends on what the meaning of "is" is. I mean what the meaning of "disgrace" is.





Okay, this is my last "Oh God not Newt" thread for the day. I think. I'll try to hold back until tomorrow.

Did you forget what was gong on then? Newt was taking down their guy and they decided to take newt down.

All but one of the ethics violations were dismissed as there was no proof of them. They were fabrications. They were lies. That's all they were.

There were 84 allegations in all and 83 were summarily dropped. The 84th was on its face inaccurate as it charged that something that occurred 4 years before Newt became speaker occurred while he was speaker.

The question of what "is" is pertains to Clinton. The question of how to eliminate a political foe is what this illustrates and it smears the Democrats more than it smears Newt.

When the facts are there to find, why do you spread lies instead?



Washingtonpost.com: Ethics Committee Drops Last of 84 Ethics Charges Against Gingrich

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.

you, sir, are a moron and a gingrich supporter.

but i repeat myself.










apologies to mark twain

 

[AmericanFirst]

On Hannity Newt said that he didn't resign in disgrace from the congress.

WTFlock?

How does he back up that claim? I guess it depends on what the meaning of "is" is. I mean what the meaning of "disgrace" is.





Okay, this is my last "Oh God not Newt" thread for the day. I think. I'll try to hold back until tomorrow.

Did you forget what was gong on then? Newt was taking down their guy and they decided to take newt down.

All but one of the ethics violations were dismissed as there was no proof of them. They were fabrications. They were lies. That's all they were.

There were 84 allegations in all and 83 were summarily dropped. The 84th was on its face inaccurate as it charged that something that occurred 4 years before Newt became speaker occurred while he was speaker.

The question of what "is" is pertains to Clinton. The question of how to eliminate a political foe is what this illustrates and it smears the Democrats more than it smears Newt.

When the facts are there to find, why do you spread lies instead?



Washingtonpost.com: Ethics Committee Drops Last of 84 Ethics Charges Against Gingrich

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.

Exactly. They wail against Newt while kissing clintons butt and he actually had sex in the oval office and lied about it. Newt was targeted as payback for the lying clinton.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Newt is better than say, edwards, clinton, weiner, frank, need I go on?

 

[del]

Newt is better than say, edwards, clinton, weiner, frank, need I go on?

no, we already know you're a fuckwit.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Yeah.....go on. While you are at it.....please say WHAT he is better at.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Newt is better than say, edwards, clinton, weiner, frank, need I go on?

Better enough to not be the fuck out of politics?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Newt resigned in a desperate attempt to keep Larry Flynt from spilling the beans on more of Newt's affairs.

 

[California Girl]

Newt is better than say, edwards, clinton, weiner, frank, need I go on?

Is 'better' one of those words that we've redefined to mean something completely different?