Fact checking Romney's attacks on Gingrichby Anthony Martin
Conservative Examiner
January 29, 2012
In a series of television ads and speeches in Florida in the run up to the state's Republican primary on Tuesday, Mitt Romney has launched a series of serious attacks against Newt Gingrich that have had a definite impact on the race. Gingrich's nine point lead has evaporated, and Romney is now in the lead by 11 percentage points, according to several polls released over the weekend.
Romney used the very same tactic in Iowa to obliterate Gingrich's lead.an in depth report on the matter in the Washington Examiner. At issue was a college course Gingrich had developed and taught at two Georgia colleges from 1993 to 1995. The course was funded by a tax-exempt organization called the 'Progress and Freedom Foundation.'
Gingrich maintained that the course was a legitimate educational enterprise. Apparently so did the colleges involved, given their approval of adding the courses to their curricula.
But a highly partisan Democrat who had run an unsuccessful campaign against Gingrich in Georgia brought the ethics complaint as soon as he was beaten in 1994, contending that the college course had no educational value and was designed to do nothing more than to spread the Gingrich political propaganda, using a tax-exempt organization to pay the bills.
So hamstrung were Gingrich and House Republicans by the massive amount negative publicity generated by the complaint that Gingrich agreed to admit to limited guilt "just to get the matter over with and move on." But Democrats wanted a criminal investigation as well--an idea that went nowhere. Then, they demanded an IRS investigation.
That investigation took three years. And in spite of the fact that Gingrich had admitted limited guilt in the case, the IRS determined at the completion of its exhaustive investigation that he had done nothing wrong whatsoever. Nothing. The IRS had thoroughly delved into practically everything Gingrich had said in his college course, in addition to interviewing actual students who sat in his classes. Again, the IRS found that the course was a legitimate educational enterprise and that no wrongdoing had been committed.
These findings were announced by the IRS in 1999, the year Gingrich voluntarily resigned, not in disgrace but as an innocent man who had been the victim of highly politically motivated charges--bogus charges.
Second, Romney has repeatedly made the charge that Gingrich was "fined $300,000 for his ethics violations."
The charge is false.
It has already been established that Gingrich committed no ethics violations, as determined by the IRS. The so-called 'fine' of $300,000 was actually a voluntary contribution of Gingrich to the House to cover the costs of the investigation initiated by Democrats who had obvious ulterior political motives. When the Speaker agreed to admit to limited guilt in order to get the matter settled, he also stated that he would cover the costs of the investigation against him out of his own pocket--personal funds and not campaign funds. His $300,000 payment to the House was issued before the IRS concluded that he was not guilty.
That can hardly be considered a 'fine.'
Thus, the fine was not really a fine. The ethics violations turned out to be no violations. The charges at the time, in the 1990s, were false, and the charges presently being made by Mitt Romney are also false.
Few, however, in the news media or among the political pundits have done any fact checking on Romney's charges against Gingrich. And when they have done so, it was only in a cursory fashion along with the excuse that campaigns always go negative on whoever is perceived to be the front runner.
But Romney's charges are very serious and they have been very effective, which begs the question, "Are they true?"
A look at two of the most serious of Romney's claims will prove to be very telling.
First, Romney has stated repeatedly that Gingrich was "forced to resign as Speaker of the House in disgrace" due to ethics charges.
The claim is false.
As soon as Gingrich was elected Speaker of the House in 1995, the Democrats embarked on an orchestrated effort to stymie Gingrich and the 'Contract with America' by bringing a series of ethics charges against the Speaker. Each charge was rebuffed by the House Ethics Committee for being not only untrue but trivial.
But as soon as one charge was dismissed, the Democrat machine would bring another complaint. Each time a complaint was brought a rebuttal would follow, which then would be immediately followed by yet another complaint, then another, and then another--not ten times, not 20 times, not 30, 40, 50, or even 60 times.
The Democrats issued no less than 84 ethics complaints against Gingrich during his term as Speaker from 1995 to 1999. Out of 84 ethics complaints, only one was found to have some possible merit.
But the one that finally gained traction was highly complicated, as shown in
No comments:
Post a Comment