Here's what she has said thus far about Newt:
"One of these days we'll have a conversation about Newt Gingrich. . . . I know a lot about him. I served on the [Ethics] 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."But isn't an ethics committee investigation supposed to be private? If she can really talk about it, or if it is subject to the Freedom of Information Act, why don't we already have it?
Pelosi further stated that, at one point in the investigation, it was so sensitive that she asked her husband to leave the bedroom at 3:00 am so she could talk privately on the telephone about it. She did tell the San Francisco Chronicle in 1997 that "he is such a hypocrit."
Gingrich was sanctioned by the House with a $300,000 fine for using tax-exempt money for political purposes; but Pelosi said she had wanted them to censure him.
Meanwhile, enjoy Barney Frank's comment:
"I did not think I had lived a good enough life to be rewarded by Newt Gingrich being the Republican nominee."Let us hope that sentiment is not misguided. I don't even trust Newt to remain Newt and behave the way we have come to expect him to.
Ralph
Oops. I'm afraid this was a big mistake on Pelosi's part. I would think she's too smart a politician to have done that.
ReplyDeleteNewt lost no time in responding.
"First of all, I want to thank Speaker Pelosi for what I regard as an early Christmas gift. . . Well, if she suggested that she's going to use material that she developed when she was on the ethics committee, that is a fundamental violation of the rules of the House and I would hope that members would immediately file charges against her the second she does it. I think it shows you how capriciously political that committee was when she was on it."
Score one for Newt. Very smart. Pelosi's comment reminds people that Newt was sanctioned for ethical violation. But now he is able to claim that it was all political.
Pelosi's office quickly responding saying that she was only referring to the extensive information that is already in the public record. That's not very convincing given what she said and what she implied she would reveal later.
Even if she doesn't reveal any secret information, that is a dirty trick that I vehemently oppose when the other side does it.
ReplyDeleteSaying, in effect, "If you only knew what I know about X." And then not being able to divulge what you're hinting at. The other person has no way to defend himself -- other than what Newt just did: turn you into the villain and him the victim.
Do I believe Pelosi probably knows something really bad that we don't know about? Yes, indeed. But this is dirty politics when it comes from the Republicans and it has to be seen as the same when it's from our side.