I believe those thousand pages are known colloquially as "The Washington Post".

"Pelosi turned me into a Newt!"

"A Newt?"

"I got better."

Tellingthem: Oh for christs sake what is this high school? If you have it then just release it. If you don't then shut up.

This, plus: Wouldn't releasing the findings of an ethics committee for poitical gain in itself be an ethics violation?

So at what point does witholding information on crimes become a crime itself? Though i'm sure congress has granted themselves an exception to those laws.

It seems to me that if you have something that can utterly destroy someone's career, then you keep your mouth shut until the person becomes the official nominee of his or her party, at which time you exploit it. If you hint that you have the info at any time prior to that without actually releasing some of it, I'm going to think that you are bluffing.

Wait. Maybe she just wants us to think that she is bluffing, when she actually isn't?

Mr. Coffee Nerves: "more attractive" being a relative term, of course.

As in "That 875-pound woman whose head is encased in a giant zit and who has not known the shower's steamy kiss since Vic Tayback roamed the earth is certainly more attractive than that 1,290-pound woman covered in weeping sores who has welded herself to her Barcalounger 5000 thanks to the magic of not being able to walk to the bathroom."

[the-shiat-i-put-up-with.jpg]

LouDobbsAwaaaay: The GOP has a much different definition of "dirt" than the rest of humanity. Romney's history with getting affordable healthcare to his constituents qualifies as "dirt". The kinds of awful things that would tank a politician's career indefinitely 20 years ago are now points of pride with the modern GOP.

Examples and citations?

houginator: So at what point does witholding information on crimes become a crime itself? Though i'm sure congress has granted themselves an exception to those laws.

What makes you think he committed crimes?

Hey, how about letting us see the dirt on EVERYBODY in Congress.

That would be pretty neat.

houginator: So at what point does witholding information on crimes become a crime itself? Though i'm sure congress has granted themselves an exception to those laws.

Ask Penn State, or ESPN.

kingoomieiii: Tellingthem: Oh for christs sake what is this high school? If you have it then just release it. If you don't then shut up.

I don't even know why she's saying anything about it now. Better to hold it when he gets the NOMINATION. That way, instead of causing the GOP to go with someone else, she can actually tank their chances at the presidency.


Do you think a vague threat from Pelosi, with the promise of evidence later, will hurt him or be seen by GOP primary voters as proof that the democrats are 'afraid of Newt' and help him? Do you think that any GOP primary voters will vote for Newt for the sole reason of spiting Pelosi?

Asked to comment about Newt's ascent in the polls:

BigJ7489: Tellingthem: Oh for christs sake what is this high school? If you have it then just release it. If you don't then shut up.

This, plus: Wouldn't releasing the findings of an ethics committee for poitical gain in itself be an ethics violation?

Yes, it would be wrong to let people know what their elected leaders are up to, wouldn't it?

FlashHarry: even with a complicit media, he'll be proven wrong.

Even if he gets the GOP nomination?
HAH.
HAHAHAHAHA.

Tellingthem: Oh for christs sake what is this high school? If you have it then just release it. If you don't then shut up.

Well, releasing it now would give Newt's team much more time to respond to the allegations. By waiting, she loses nothing.

/though announcing it and baiting the media could hurt her cause if she continues to make a big deal of it and it turns out to be a let down.

Wendy's Chili: Yes, it would be wrong to let people know what their elected leaders are up to, wouldn't it?

Releasing it purposely to spite a political 'opponent' is kind of unethical, though it comes down to a "motivations vs. the results" debate.

fracto73: Do you think that any GOP primary voters will vote for Newt for the sole reason of spiting Pelosi?

Depends on how well she can be portrayed as the all-seeing all-controlling Evil Ice Queen of the Demotards.

"Newt finished the last of the Honey Nut Cheerios from the House of Representatives main kitchen pantry and didn't holla on it, yo."

/Indeed

houginator: So at what point does witholding information on crimes become a crime itself?

Ethics violations are not crimes. Having drunken orgies with your pages (for example) isn't illegal, but it does make the House look bad.


Newt resigned. You do have to wonder why.

tomcatadam: fracto73: Do you think that any GOP primary voters will vote for Newt for the sole reason of spiting Pelosi?

Depends on how well she can be portrayed as the all-seeing all-controlling Evil Ice Queen of the Demotards again.

FTFY

Unless you're going to tell me he was caught balls deep in Martha Washington's corpse on the Lincoln Memorial's lap, I'm gonna have a hard time being shocked or surprised by any new information about Newt farking Gingrich.

DarnoKonrad: houginator: So at what point does witholding information on crimes become a crime itself?

Ethics violations are not crimes. Having drunken orgies with your pages (for example) isn't illegal, but it does make the House look bad.


Newt resigned. You do have to wonder why.

He resigned to spend more time with his families.

One thing I can say as a progressive is, he is totally unacceptable to me as president. I hate Newt Gingrich with the white heat of a thousand suns, and if he won the nomination it would just infuriate me. I hope conservatives will have the common sense to nominate a more moderate Republican like Romney; someone who we know can make compromises to make progress in Washington.

Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: Unless you're going to tell me he was caught balls deep in Martha Washington's corpse on the Lincoln Memorial's lap, I'm gonna have a hard time being shocked or surprised by any new information about Newt farking Gingrich.

Dad?

JimbobMcClan: Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: Unless you're going to tell me he was caught balls deep in Martha Washington's corpse on the Lincoln Memorial's lap, I'm gonna have a hard time being shocked or surprised by any new information about Newt farking Gingrich.

Dad?

Depends. Is the child support due?

tomcatadam: Wendy's Chili: Yes, it would be wrong to let people know what their elected leaders are up to, wouldn't it?

Releasing it purposely to spite a political 'opponent' is kind of unethical, though it comes down to a "motivations vs. the results" debate.

If it happened, it happened. Releasing it isn't an ethics violation.

Starting "investigations" to make opponents look bad (new window), on the other hand, are kind of f*cked up.

mrshowrules: This. The DNC needs to chill the fark out and not ruin his chance at the nomination. Keep up the strategy of attacking Romney on flip-flopping and being a secret liberal. Pretend to be scared of Gingrich but not having anything solid to criticize him on.

Ridiculous. Democrats should just speak their mind about how they really feel. It's too far out from the election to predict how well Gingrich might connect with voters. People are angry, they're calling for radical change, and Newt isn't afraid to express radical ideas. He could easily be the next Reagan, which is why the prospect that he could win the nomination is so chilling.

bugontherug: One thing I can say as a progressive is, he is totally unacceptable to me as president. I hate Newt Gingrich with the white heat of a thousand suns, and if he won the nomination it would just infuriate me. I hope conservatives will have the common sense to nominate a more moderate Republican like Romney; someone who we know can make compromises to make progress in Washington.

I am not sure "having the opposite position" in the past means the same as "supporting the opposite position" or even "compromising with the opposite position" in today's no-holds-barred GOP derpamania.

fracto73: kingoomieiii: Tellingthem: Oh for christs sake what is this high school? If you have it then just release it. If you don't then shut up.

I don't even know why she's saying anything about it now. Better to hold it when he gets the NOMINATION. That way, instead of causing the GOP to go with someone else, she can actually tank their chances at the presidency.


Do you think a vague threat from Pelosi, with the promise of evidence later, will hurt him or be seen by GOP primary voters as proof that the democrats are 'afraid of Newt' and help him? Do you think that any GOP primary voters will vote for Newt for the sole reason of spiting Pelosi?

Since their entire policy position is based on spite, I think it is possible.

I think it's a bluff; there is nothing that Pelosi and the Democrats have on Gingrich that will make him look like a worse excuse for a human being.

I do love all the "Newt never did anything as bad as Pelosi's husband buying VISA stock and her brother in law getting hired to a bank with an indirect relationship with a federal funds recepient before he was ever hired!" comments on this matter that show these people don't have the first clue what sort of stuff we already know Newt was ankle deep in as Speaker.

Wendy's Chili:
If it happened, it happened. Releasing it isn't an ethics violation.

Newt's actual response:
"First of all I'd like to thank Speaker Pelosi for what I regard as an early Christmas gift. If she's suggesting she's gonna use material she developed while she was on the ethics committee, that is a fundamental violation of the rules of the House and I would hope members would immediately file charges against her the second she does it."