Readers of “Contentions” know I have significant concerns when it comes to Newt Gingrich’s presidential candidacy. But even critics of the former House speaker should insist that the charges leveled against him be accurate rather than fictional. And so I agree with this editorial in the Wall Street Journal, which asserts that Mitt Romney’s attacks on Gingrich’s ethics case in the 1990s are misleading.
It’s clear the charges against Gingrich were trumped up; the IRS exonerated him after a multi-year investigation (see this CNN report at the time). For Governor Romney to now say, as he repeatedly does, that Gingrich “resigned in disgrace,” simply isn’t fair. Gingrich’s resignation was not connected to the ethics charges made against him. He was, in fact, the victim of a smear. And to give that smear new life is wrong. It really ought to stop.
My respect for Peter Wehner has only increased with this post. I have been disappointed with many commentators on contentions who had earlier castigated Newt Gingrich for the unfair Bain attacks on Romney. I thought that stand was based on principles. But the silence, if not tacit endorsement of the unfair Romney attacks on Gingrich is troubling to say the least. Kwame
I agree, nebkwa. I've come to have a high regard for Peter's objectivity and honesty, too. I now try to read all of his posts.
Thank you for your comment, Mr. Wehner. On more than a few occasions, Mitt Romney has proven himself to be more cynical and dishonest than even Barak Obama. Yet again, Romney has compromised himself to the point that his fitness to serve as our president can be doubted.
You could be right, but putting Gingrich in the same sentence as victim isn't worth writing about. How much invective is in Gingrich's capacity to hurl at anyone who gets in the way of his quest for perpetual relevance? And by anyone, I include the Republican party, which he has damaged by insisting that he is somehow not the establishment candidate.
Yep, that's Mitt, the guy everyone thinks conservatives should rally around with no questions asked as a true "conservative" buying into the garbage line of the Clinton mafioso of the 90s and their lackeys who went after Newt with garbage because he'd had the temerity to bring down Daniel Ortega's lapdog, Jim Wright. And people wonder why there are so many in the ranks of conservatism who look at Romney and see another Dole and McCain campaign in the making?
I think it's fair to say Gingrich 'resigned in disgrace'… it depends on what you mean by 'disgrace'. To me, while he didn't break any laws, his performance as Speaker was disgraceful. Getting outmaneuvered by Clinton was disgraceful. Taking the book advance at that point was disgraceful. Thus, the word fits.