info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Zombie Newt Gingrich Is Supposed To Be GOP Savior?
4 views
Skip to first unread message
Bradley K. Sherman
Dec 1, 2011, 6:41:14 PM12/1/11
to
The only Speaker of the House *ever* formally rebuked and fined in
the history of the United States. For ethics violations!
This is the best the GOP can do?
Yow!
--bks
Sid9
Dec 1, 2011, 6:43:59 PM12/1/11
to
"Bradley K. Sherman" <b...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:jb93aq$5hm$1...@panix3.panix.com...
.
.
$300,000.00 fine...paid for...not by him but from donated campaign funds
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 7:21:39 PM12/1/11
to
"Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:jb93g2$sg4$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> $300,000.00 fine...paid for...not by him but from donated campaign funds
>
===================================
> $300,000.00 fine...paid for...not by him but from donated campaign funds
>
Newt Gingrich Cleared by IRS !
Now How About a Refund?
By Carolyn Gargaro
February 16, 1999
Newt Gingrich has been cleared!!
Remember the uproar regarding Newt's "ethics violations?" People can refresh
their memory by reading an article I wrote in 1997 about these charges. In
brief, David Bonior brought 75 ethics charges against Newt, 74 which were
found to have no merit whatsoever (and people say that Ken Starr is on a
"witch hunt?"). The last charge, whether Newt funded his college class
"Renewing American Civilization" properly, was too complicated a tax issue
for the committee to investigate on its own, so they brought in an outside
tax expert to investigate. Two charges arose out of this investigation.
The first 'charge' from the ethics committee is that he "may have" violated
tax law by using tax-deductible contributions from nonprofit organizations
to teach an allegedly partisan college course.
The second 'charge' from the committee is that, in the course of the
investigation, Newt provided false information to the committee. And what
was this "false information?" Newt testified that the above contributions
were in fact made by those organizations to "Renewing American
Civilization." He filed papers that stated the very same thing. This is
never a fact that anyone was trying to hide. But one paper filed with the
committee stated that those groups did not make the contributions. For this,
there was an uproar about Newt's ethics, and he was fined.
Basically, Newt was fined $300,000 because he didn't read his lawyers'
documents carefully. I could really get into the hypocrisy of this in light
of the fact that people want to excuse Bill Clinton for lying under oath,
(maybe if the course Newt had taught was about SEX the Democrats would feel
differently) but that's not the point of this article.
Well, after a 3.5 year probe, after Newt paid the $300,000 fine, the IRS
announced on February 3, 1999, that it found NO IMPROPRIETIES IN THE TAX
FILINGS of Gingrich and the sponsoring Progress and Freedom Foundation. The
IRS said the principles taught in the course were not of use only in
political campaigns. "The ... course taught principles from American
civilization that could be used by each American in everyday life whether
the person is a welfare recipient, the head of a large corporation, or a
politician."
Well isn't that nice - and isn't that what Newt had been saying all along?
In other words, the ethics charges David Bonior filed against Newt were ALL
bogus. Every single one of them. In the end, what was Newt's "ethics
problems"? One of the papers filed by his lawyers had an error and Newt
didn't catch it. That little oversight cost $300,000.
Some might say "vindication is vindication" and Newt should just be tickled
about this. . . but would YOU feel better if you've already lost $300,000
and your job in the process?
Where are the cries about how long and how much money was spent on this
investigation? Where are all the news stories about this vindication?
Granted, there have been some news stories but certainly not that many.
Perhaps the news isn't quite as big when it's Newt who is the one in the
right and his accusers are the ones in the wrong.
Now, if some people already see the irony of Newt being blasted for "lying
to congress" because one of his lawyers' documents was in error while people
argue that we should ignore that fact that Bill Clinton lied under oath,
here's a little more irony for you.
Democrats have argued over and over again that even if Clinton DID lie in
his deposition in Paula Jones' sexual harassment suit, it doesn't matter
because the suit was eventually thrown out of court. Thus, any lies were
"not material" and so not valid grounds for punishment, and certainly not
impeachment. Well, the IRS has found that there were NO IMPROPRIETIES IN THE
TAX FILINGS. Using the same rationale as Clinton's supporters, shouldn't
Newt Gingrich be allowed to get his $300,000 back, since any misstatements
he might have made are now "not material?"
David Bonior stated a couple of years ago that "Mr. Gingrich engaged in a
pattern of tax fraud." Well, it now looks as if Bonior was way out in left
field on all 75 of his accusations. How about a censure of David Bonior for
filing 7 unfounded charges against him, so Newt can at least get his good
name back? But how could I forget? We are in the age of forgiveness, where
we just "forgive and forget" perjury and obstruction of justice, so I guess
that means forgiving David Bonior too. Too bad people weren't as "forgiving"
when it was Newt Gingrich in the hot seat.
Bradley K. Sherman
Dec 1, 2011, 7:24:13 PM12/1/11
to
The IRS cannot clear a formal reprimand by the House of
Representatives. Newt Gingrich is the only Speaker *ever*
to be publically rebuked and fined by the House. He's
a disgrace.
--bks
Sid9
Dec 1, 2011, 7:25:31 PM12/1/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
wrote in message news:3SUBq.1454$mJ....@newsfe10.iad...
.
.
The House overwhelmingly voted against Newt. The find him $300,000.00 which
he paid in a questionable way.
6K of bullshit wont change the record.
Gingrich for the Republican nominee!
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 8:09:58 PM12/1/11
to
news:jb95rd$hvm$1...@reader1.panix.com...
he violated the law which the IRS later proved he didn't, you fucking
Obamaggot Baboon ass fucker.
>
> The IRS cannot clear a formal reprimand by the House of
> Representatives.
The only reason Newt was reprimanded was because of the false charges that
> The IRS cannot clear a formal reprimand by the House of
> Representatives.
he violated the law which the IRS later proved he didn't, you fucking
Obamaggot Baboon ass fucker.
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 8:11:03 PM12/1/11
to
news:jb95tu$fhg$1...@dont-email.me...
=============
Too bad the IRS proved he was fined for false charges and Exonerated by the
IRS. Nasty Piglosi owes Newt his $ 300 k back, the fucking witch from San
fransicko.
Too bad the IRS proved he was fined for false charges and Exonerated by the
IRS. Nasty Piglosi owes Newt his $ 300 k back, the fucking witch from San
fransicko.
Bradley K. Sherman
Dec 1, 2011, 8:27:07 PM12/1/11
to
The first and only Speaker formally reprimanded by the House of
Representatives. For ethics violations! A national disgrace
named "Newt Gingrich."
Even patriotic conservatives loathe him:
<http://www.verumserum.com/?p=34603>
--bks
Dakota
Dec 1, 2011, 8:27:33 PM12/1/11
to
> The House overwhelmingly voted against Newt. The find him $300,000.00
> which he paid in a questionable way.
> 6K of bullshit wont change the record.
>
> Gingrich for the Republican nominee!
Especially when the bullshit comes from a conservative kook writing for
> which he paid in a questionable way.
> 6K of bullshit wont change the record.
>
> Gingrich for the Republican nominee!
a site she co-founded called rightgrrl.com. Here's the link:
http://www.rightgrrl.com/carolyn/newt.html
Sid9
Dec 1, 2011, 8:51:49 PM12/1/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
Listen to the silence!
Sid9
Dec 1, 2011, 8:53:13 PM12/1/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
Don’t get me wrong I'm for his candidacy.
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 9:11:19 PM12/1/11
to
news:jb99hb$22k$1...@reader1.panix.com...
IRS clears Newt Gingrich's college course
By Brooks Jackson/CNN
February 3, 1999
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/03/gingrich/
IRS clears Newt Gingrich's college course
By Brooks Jackson/CNN
February 3, 1999
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/03/gingrich/
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 9:11:54 PM12/1/11
to
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 9:11:37 PM12/1/11
to
Sid9
Dec 1, 2011, 9:12:58 PM12/1/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
They stand.
I support Newt to oppose Obama!
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 9:12:45 PM12/1/11
to
"Dakota" <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com> wrote in message
news:jb99hk$299$1...@dont-email.me...
Ok, then heres a Liberal Left wing k00k cite for ya then.
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 9:17:45 PM12/1/11
to
news:jb9c7d$ftk$1...@dont-email.me...
==========================
the $300 k was to cost reimburse the hundreds of hours the committee spent
trying to figure out what if any laws were broken by Newt. Since the house
committee was too fucking stupid to figure out there were no laws broken, it
took the IRS to officially clear Newt over 2 years later.
Not one Obamaggot in the house apologized to Newt for smearing him.
the $300 k was to cost reimburse the hundreds of hours the committee spent
trying to figure out what if any laws were broken by Newt. Since the house
committee was too fucking stupid to figure out there were no laws broken, it
took the IRS to officially clear Newt over 2 years later.
Not one Obamaggot in the house apologized to Newt for smearing him.
Sid9
Dec 1, 2011, 9:18:18 PM12/1/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
Sid9
Dec 1, 2011, 9:19:10 PM12/1/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
.
.
.
The stain wont go away.
The house has not reversed their decision nor the fine.
They stand.
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 9:24:11 PM12/1/11
to
news:jb9cj1$hi5$1...@dont-email.me...
Gingrich faced some 84 ethics complaints; they were leveled mostly by House
Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his
blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one of
those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
He paid $300,000 for the cost of investigating the final complaint - whether
Gingrich's college course had violated federal tax law - as part of an
agreement with House ethics investigators. Led by Republicans, the ethics
committee never reached a conclusion about that allegation. And the IRS
cleared the organizations connected with the course of any tax violations.
http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/05/former_house_speaker_newt_ging.html
Gingrich faced some 84 ethics complaints; they were leveled mostly by House
Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his
blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one of
those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
He paid $300,000 for the cost of investigating the final complaint - whether
Gingrich's college course had violated federal tax law - as part of an
agreement with House ethics investigators. Led by Republicans, the ethics
committee never reached a conclusion about that allegation. And the IRS
cleared the organizations connected with the course of any tax violations.
http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/05/former_house_speaker_newt_ging.html
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 9:24:36 PM12/1/11
to
news:jb9chd$hbo$1...@dont-email.me...
Gingrich's college course had violated federal tax law — as part of an
>
Gingrich faced some 84 ethics complaints; they were leveled mostly by House
Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his
blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one of
those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
He paid $300,000 for the cost of investigating the final complaint — whether
Gingrich faced some 84 ethics complaints; they were leveled mostly by House
Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his
blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one of
those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
Gingrich's college course had violated federal tax law — as part of an
M.I. Wakefield
Dec 1, 2011, 9:40:45 PM12/1/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" wrote in message
news:YEWBq.2299$XA2....@newsfe06.iad...
"In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable
statements were given to the committee".
- Newt Gingrich, January, 1997
The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information supplied to
investigators represented "intentional or ... reckless" disregard of House
rules.
Sid9
Dec 1, 2011, 10:07:40 PM12/1/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
They stand.
Support Newt!
Sid9
Dec 1, 2011, 10:07:53 PM12/1/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
Sid9
Dec 1, 2011, 10:08:22 PM12/1/11
to
"M.I. Wakefield" <none@present> wrote in message
news:TUWBq.157000$We5....@unlimited.newshosting.com...
.
.
C...@prayforme.com
Dec 1, 2011, 10:49:30 PM12/1/11
to
"As an American I am not so shocked that Obama was given the Nobel
Peace Prize without any accomplishments to his name, because America
gave him the White House based on the same credentials."
~Newt Gingrich
"Please please please please please please...Let it be Newt"
--6313 Dead, 1456 since 1/20/09
Obama won his Senate seat not on his own merits but by scandalizing
his opponent so they'd drop out.
"What ever Newt's done in his past is nothing compared to the snake in
the White House."
--CB
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 10:56:11 PM12/1/11
to
"M.I. Wakefield" <none@present> wrote in message
news:TUWBq.157000$We5....@unlimited.newshosting.com...
>
>
You mean like charlie rangel?
Washington (CNN) - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appeared Friday to defend Rep.
Charles Rangel, D-New York, over ethics charges that led to his admonishment
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/26/pelosi-supports-rangel-over-ethics-charges/
>
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 10:58:05 PM12/1/11
to
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 10:57:40 PM12/1/11
to
news:jb9ff9$v5u$1...@dont-email.me...
Pelosi stands behind disgraced and Tax Criminal Charlie rangel.
Pelosi stands behind disgraced and Tax Criminal Charlie rangel.
Sid9
Dec 1, 2011, 11:00:55 PM12/1/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
Sid9
Dec 1, 2011, 11:02:15 PM12/1/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 11:04:09 PM12/1/11
to
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 11:04:24 PM12/1/11
to
Sid9
Dec 1, 2011, 11:03:28 PM12/1/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
Sid9
Dec 1, 2011, 11:09:54 PM12/1/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
found Gingrich guilty of ETHICS violations and fined him $300,000.00, a fine
he paid in a shady way.
I support Newt to oppose Obama next November!
M.I. Wakefield
Dec 1, 2011, 11:10:12 PM12/1/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" wrote in message
news:c%XBq.5602$2e7....@newsfe18.iad...
> "M.I. Wakefield" <none@present> wrote in message
> news:TUWBq.157000$We5....@unlimited.newshosting.com...
> >
> > "In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable
> > statements were given to the committee".
> >
> > - Newt Gingrich, January, 1997
> >
> > The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information
> > supplied to investigators represented "intentional or ... reckless"
> > disregard of House rules.
> > ==============
>
> You mean like charlie rangel?
Non sequitur ... unless Rangel has announced he's running for President, of
> > statements were given to the committee".
> >
> > - Newt Gingrich, January, 1997
> >
> > The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information
> > supplied to investigators represented "intentional or ... reckless"
> > disregard of House rules.
> > ==============
>
> You mean like charlie rangel?
course.
Sid9
Dec 1, 2011, 11:10:21 PM12/1/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
No matter how many times you post it it wont change the fact that the House
found Gingrich guilty of ETHICS violations and fined him $300,000.00, a fine
he paid in a shady way.
I support Newt to oppose Obama next November!
found Gingrich guilty of ETHICS violations and fined him $300,000.00, a fine
he paid in a shady way.
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 11:41:42 PM12/1/11
to
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 11:42:41 PM12/1/11
to
"M.I. Wakefield" <none@present> wrote in message
Funny how Rats circle the wagons around admitted Federal tax Cheat democrap
Congress rats, while attacking Gingrich who the IRS Exonerated.
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 11:44:24 PM12/1/11
to
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 1, 2011, 11:44:38 PM12/1/11
to
news:jb9imj$f30$1...@dont-email.me...
Gingrich's college course had violated federal tax law - as part of an
>
Gingrich faced some 84 ethics complaints; they were leveled mostly by House
Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his
blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one of
those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
He paid $300,000 for the cost of investigating the final complaint - whether
Gingrich faced some 84 ethics complaints; they were leveled mostly by House
Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his
blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one of
those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
Gingrich's college course had violated federal tax law - as part of an
Richard Steel
Dec 2, 2011, 12:39:48 AM12/2/11
to
> > Pelosi stands behind disgraced and Tax Criminal Charlie rangel.
> > Washington (CNN) - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appeared Friday to defend
> > Rep. Charles Rangel, D-New York, over ethics charges that led to his
> > admonishment
> Charlie Rangel is not running for president
which was completely legal. How much under the table "gifts" did
Charlie take from Landlords?
Richard Steel
Dec 2, 2011, 12:51:43 AM12/2/11
to
On Dec 1, 8:09 pm, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
> " BAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
> wrote in messagenews:G6YBq.4298$U16....@newsfe15.iad...
> " BAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >news:jb9ika$er6$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> > Gingrich faced some 84 ethics complaints; they were leveled mostly by
> > House
> > Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his
> > blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one
> > of
> > those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
>
> > He paid $300,000 for the cost of investigating the final complaint -
> > whether
> > Gingrich's college course had violated federal tax law - as part of an
> > agreement with House ethics investigators. Led by Republicans, the ethics
> > committee never reached a conclusion about that allegation. And the IRS
> > cleared the organizations connected with the course of any tax violations.
>
> >http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/05/former_house_speaker_...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >news:jb9ika$er6$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> > Gingrich faced some 84 ethics complaints; they were leveled mostly by
> > House
> > Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his
> > blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one
> > of
> > those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
>
> > He paid $300,000 for the cost of investigating the final complaint -
> > whether
> > Gingrich's college course had violated federal tax law - as part of an
> > agreement with House ethics investigators. Led by Republicans, the ethics
> > committee never reached a conclusion about that allegation. And the IRS
> > cleared the organizations connected with the course of any tax violations.
>
>
> No matter how many times you post it it wont change the fact that the House
> found Gingrich guilty of ETHICS violations and fined him $300,000.00, a fine
> he paid in a shady way.
What, EXACTLY, did Newt do?
> No matter how many times you post it it wont change the fact that the House
> found Gingrich guilty of ETHICS violations and fined him $300,000.00, a fine
> he paid in a shady way.
Oh, right.....he taught an American History Course. The IRS cleared
him of wrongdoing.
Would you like to revisit Obama's sweetheart loan from noted Mobster
Tony Rezko? Got the house for a couple of hundred thousand under it's
market value and low low low interest rates?
Where is Tony doing these days? He's doing 10 and a half years in
prison.
And Newt ....taught....a College Class.
And you guys want to reopen THOSE worms?
Bwahahahahahahahahahhahahahahaha.
> I support Newt to oppose Obama next November!
Richard Steel
Dec 2, 2011, 12:35:05 AM12/2/11
to
> > And the IRS
> > cleared the organizations connected with the course of any tax violations.
> >http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/05/former_house_speaker_...
> > cleared the organizations connected with the course of any tax violations.
> Congress neither reversed their conviction nor the $300,000.00 fine.
> They stand.
Class...WHICH WAS COMPLETELY LEGAL.
And you're proud of that?
emoneyjoe
Dec 2, 2011, 1:52:46 AM12/2/11
to
On Thu, 1 Dec 2011 21:19:10 -0500, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
>"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
>wrote in message news:VyWBq.5601$2e7....@newsfe18.iad...
>> news:jb9c7d$ftk$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>> "ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white
>>> House.gov> wrote in message news:atWBq.1634$cG....@newsfe14.iad...
>>>> news:jb9avo$9jf$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> IRS clears Newt Gingrich's college course
>>>> By Brooks Jackson/CNN
>>>> February 3, 1999
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/03/gingrich/
>>>
>>> The house has not reversed their decision nor the fine.
>>> They stand.
>>>
>> ==========================
>>
>> the $300 k was to cost reimburse the hundreds of hours the committee spent
>> trying to figure out what if any laws were broken by Newt. Since the
>> house committee was too fucking stupid to figure out there were no laws
>> broken, it took the IRS to officially clear Newt over 2 years later.
>> Not one Obamaggot in the house apologized to Newt for smearing him.
>>
>> IRS clears Newt Gingrich's college course
>> By Brooks Jackson/CNN
>> February 3, 1999
>> http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/03/gingrich/
>
>,
>.
>.
>.
>The stain wont go away.
>
>The house has not reversed their decision nor the fine.
>They stand.
>
>I support Newt to oppose Obama!
Be careful what you wish for. :-)
>"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
>wrote in message news:VyWBq.5601$2e7....@newsfe18.iad...
>> news:jb9c7d$ftk$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>
>>> "ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white
>>> House.gov> wrote in message news:atWBq.1634$cG....@newsfe14.iad...
>>>> news:jb9avo$9jf$1...@dont-email.me...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> IRS clears Newt Gingrich's college course
>>>> By Brooks Jackson/CNN
>>>> February 3, 1999
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/03/gingrich/
>>>
>>> The house has not reversed their decision nor the fine.
>>> They stand.
>>>
>> ==========================
>>
>> the $300 k was to cost reimburse the hundreds of hours the committee spent
>> trying to figure out what if any laws were broken by Newt. Since the
>> house committee was too fucking stupid to figure out there were no laws
>> broken, it took the IRS to officially clear Newt over 2 years later.
>> Not one Obamaggot in the house apologized to Newt for smearing him.
>>
>> IRS clears Newt Gingrich's college course
>> By Brooks Jackson/CNN
>> February 3, 1999
>> http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/03/gingrich/
>
>,
>.
>.
>.
>The stain wont go away.
>
>The house has not reversed their decision nor the fine.
>They stand.
>
>I support Newt to oppose Obama!
Be careful what you wish for. :-)
Dånk 42Ø
Dec 2, 2011, 1:55:33 AM12/2/11
to
On 12/01/2011 04:41 PM, Bradley K. Sherman wrote:
> The only Speaker of the House *ever* formally rebuked and fined in
> the history of the United States. For ethics violations!
> This is the best the GOP can do?
>
> Yow!
And yet you seem worried that he might win the Republican nomination.
As an anarchist who called for Emperor Bush's impeachment even after
Democraps move impeachment off the table to make room for a more
important farm subsidy bill, there isn't a snowball's chance in hell
that Newt will get my vote, though I will concede that he one of his
Party's more intelligent members.
Chairman Obama would lose a debate with a turnip, so Democrats must
ensure his opponent in dumber than a turnip. With Sarah Palin out of
the race, Democrats must promote the campaigns of the most retarded
Republicans -- Rick Perry and Michelle Bachmann in particular.
Herman Cain is the Democrats' worst nightmare: With TWO black candidates
in the general election, they would be unable to play the race card,
which explains why he is suddenly suffering so many bimbo eruptions.
Ron Paul and Jon Hunstman are far more intelligent and ethical than Newt
Gingrich, but the Democrat-controlled media refuse to acknowledge their
existence for the same reason. This leaves a three-way race between
Gingrich, Perry, and Bachmann. Of the three Republican "front-runners"
the Democrat-controlled media has created, Newt Gingrich is the least
psychotic, which is why he will not be allowed to win the nomination.
> The only Speaker of the House *ever* formally rebuked and fined in
> the history of the United States. For ethics violations!
> This is the best the GOP can do?
>
> Yow!
And yet you seem worried that he might win the Republican nomination.
As an anarchist who called for Emperor Bush's impeachment even after
Democraps move impeachment off the table to make room for a more
important farm subsidy bill, there isn't a snowball's chance in hell
that Newt will get my vote, though I will concede that he one of his
Party's more intelligent members.
Chairman Obama would lose a debate with a turnip, so Democrats must
ensure his opponent in dumber than a turnip. With Sarah Palin out of
the race, Democrats must promote the campaigns of the most retarded
Republicans -- Rick Perry and Michelle Bachmann in particular.
Herman Cain is the Democrats' worst nightmare: With TWO black candidates
in the general election, they would be unable to play the race card,
which explains why he is suddenly suffering so many bimbo eruptions.
Ron Paul and Jon Hunstman are far more intelligent and ethical than Newt
Gingrich, but the Democrat-controlled media refuse to acknowledge their
existence for the same reason. This leaves a three-way race between
Gingrich, Perry, and Bachmann. Of the three Republican "front-runners"
the Democrat-controlled media has created, Newt Gingrich is the least
psychotic, which is why he will not be allowed to win the nomination.
de...@dudu.org
Dec 2, 2011, 8:06:27 AM12/2/11
to
On Thu, 01 Dec 2011 23:55:33 -0700, Dånk 42Ø <da...@nugget.org> wrote:
>On 12/01/2011 04:41 PM, Bradley K. Sherman wrote:
>> The only Speaker of the House *ever* formally rebuked and fined in
>> the history of the United States. For ethics violations!
>> This is the best the GOP can do?
>>
>> Yow!
>
>And yet you seem worried that he might win the Republican nomination.
>As an anarchist who called for Emperor Bush's impeachment even after
>Democraps move impeachment off the table to make room for a more
>important farm subsidy bill, there isn't a snowball's chance in hell
>that Newt will get my vote, though I will concede that he one of his
>Party's more intelligent members.
>
>Chairman Obama would lose a debate with a turnip, so Democrats must
>ensure his opponent in dumber than a turnip. With Sarah Palin out of
>the race, Democrats must promote the campaigns of the most retarded
>Republicans -- Rick Perry and Michelle Bachmann in particular.
>
>Herman Cain is the Democrats' worst nightmare: With TWO black candidates
>in the general election, they would be unable to play the race card,
>which explains why he is suddenly suffering so many bimbo eruptions.
>
>Ron Paul and Jon Hunstman are far more intelligent and ethical than Newt
>Gingrich, but the Democrat-controlled media refuse to acknowledge their
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>On 12/01/2011 04:41 PM, Bradley K. Sherman wrote:
>> The only Speaker of the House *ever* formally rebuked and fined in
>> the history of the United States. For ethics violations!
>> This is the best the GOP can do?
>>
>> Yow!
>
>And yet you seem worried that he might win the Republican nomination.
>As an anarchist who called for Emperor Bush's impeachment even after
>Democraps move impeachment off the table to make room for a more
>important farm subsidy bill, there isn't a snowball's chance in hell
>that Newt will get my vote, though I will concede that he one of his
>Party's more intelligent members.
>
>Chairman Obama would lose a debate with a turnip, so Democrats must
>ensure his opponent in dumber than a turnip. With Sarah Palin out of
>the race, Democrats must promote the campaigns of the most retarded
>Republicans -- Rick Perry and Michelle Bachmann in particular.
>
>Herman Cain is the Democrats' worst nightmare: With TWO black candidates
>in the general election, they would be unable to play the race card,
>which explains why he is suddenly suffering so many bimbo eruptions.
>
>Ron Paul and Jon Hunstman are far more intelligent and ethical than Newt
>Gingrich, but the Democrat-controlled media refuse to acknowledge their
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAA
yer as crazy as a loon. Too funny.
Tim Crowley
Dec 2, 2011, 9:18:00 AM12/2/11
to
On Dec 1, 8:42 pm, ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS <Obama's Shit Stain on
Thanks for posting, it makes me smile.
You're head will explode for the last time when The President is re-
elected.
America @ white House.gov> wrote:
> "M.I. Wakefield" <none@present> wrote in message
>
> news:GcYBq.170715$_E6....@unlimited.newshosting.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "M.I. Wakefield" <none@present> wrote in message
>
> news:GcYBq.170715$_E6....@unlimited.newshosting.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > " BAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" wrote in message
> >news:c%XBq.5602$2e7....@newsfe18.iad...
>
> >> "M.I. Wakefield" <none@present> wrote in message
> >>news:TUWBq.157000$We5....@unlimited.newshosting.com...
>
> >> > "In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and
> >> > unreliable statements were given to the committee".
>
> >> > - Newt Gingrich, January, 1997
>
> >> > The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information
> >> > supplied to investigators represented "intentional or ... reckless"
> >> > disregard of House rules.
> >> > ==============
>
> >> You mean like charlie rangel?
>
> > Non sequitur ... unless Rangel has announced he's running for President,
> > of course.
> >===============
>
> Funny how Rats circle the wagons around admitted Federal tax Cheat democrap
> Congress rats, while attacking Gingrich who the IRS Exonerated.
You get more frightened even day.
> >news:c%XBq.5602$2e7....@newsfe18.iad...
>
> >> "M.I. Wakefield" <none@present> wrote in message
> >>news:TUWBq.157000$We5....@unlimited.newshosting.com...
>
> >> > "In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and
> >> > unreliable statements were given to the committee".
>
> >> > - Newt Gingrich, January, 1997
>
> >> > The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information
> >> > supplied to investigators represented "intentional or ... reckless"
> >> > disregard of House rules.
> >> > ==============
>
> >> You mean like charlie rangel?
>
> > Non sequitur ... unless Rangel has announced he's running for President,
> > of course.
> >===============
>
> Funny how Rats circle the wagons around admitted Federal tax Cheat democrap
> Congress rats, while attacking Gingrich who the IRS Exonerated.
Thanks for posting, it makes me smile.
You're head will explode for the last time when The President is re-
elected.
Tim Crowley
Dec 2, 2011, 9:15:34 AM12/2/11
to
On Dec 1, 7:56 pm, ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS <Obama's Shit Stain on
oozing from your disgusting pores.
why don't you just admit the truth, the GOP doesn't have a
candidate.. everyone that has come forward is a charlatan, an idiot
or both.
hint: rangel is not running for president. oh wait, we're talking
about newt - newt's not running for president - he's selling books.
you buy one yet, coward?
America @ white House.gov> wrote:
> "M.I. Wakefield" <none@present> wrote in message
>
> news:TUWBq.157000$We5....@unlimited.newshosting.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> news:TUWBq.157000$We5....@unlimited.newshosting.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > " BAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" wrote in message
> >news:YEWBq.2299$XA2....@newsfe06.iad...
>
> > "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >news:jb9cj1$hi5$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> > Gingrich faced some 84 ethics complaints; they were leveled mostly by
> > House
> > Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his
> > blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one
> > of
> > those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
>
> > He paid $300,000 for the cost of investigating the final complaint -
> > whether
> > Gingrich's college course had violated federal tax law - as part of an
> > agreement with House ethics investigators. Led by Republicans, the ethics
> > committee never reached a conclusion about that allegation. And the IRS
> > cleared the organizations connected with the course of any tax violations.
>
> >http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/05/former_house_speaker_...
> >news:YEWBq.2299$XA2....@newsfe06.iad...
>
> > "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >news:jb9cj1$hi5$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> > Gingrich faced some 84 ethics complaints; they were leveled mostly by
> > House
> > Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his
> > blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one
> > of
> > those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
>
> > He paid $300,000 for the cost of investigating the final complaint -
> > whether
> > Gingrich's college course had violated federal tax law - as part of an
> > agreement with House ethics investigators. Led by Republicans, the ethics
> > committee never reached a conclusion about that allegation. And the IRS
> > cleared the organizations connected with the course of any tax violations.
>
>
> > ===========================================
>
> > "In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable
> > statements were given to the committee".
>
> > - Newt Gingrich, January, 1997
>
> > The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information supplied
> > to investigators represented "intentional or ... reckless" disregard of
> > House rules.
> > ==============
>
> You mean like charlie rangel?
snicker. you always wanna change the subject, that stench of fear is
> > ===========================================
>
> > "In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable
> > statements were given to the committee".
>
> > - Newt Gingrich, January, 1997
>
> > The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information supplied
> > to investigators represented "intentional or ... reckless" disregard of
> > House rules.
> > ==============
>
> You mean like charlie rangel?
oozing from your disgusting pores.
why don't you just admit the truth, the GOP doesn't have a
candidate.. everyone that has come forward is a charlatan, an idiot
or both.
hint: rangel is not running for president. oh wait, we're talking
about newt - newt's not running for president - he's selling books.
you buy one yet, coward?
Tim Crowley
Dec 2, 2011, 9:16:23 AM12/2/11
to
On Dec 1, 8:02 pm, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
> " BAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
> wrote in messagenews:A0YBq.4297$U16....@newsfe15.iad...
> " BAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
>
>
>
> > "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >news:jb9ff9$v5u$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> > Pelosi stands behind disgraced and Tax Criminal Charlie rangel.
>
> > Washington (CNN) - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appeared Friday to defend
> > Rep. Charles Rangel, D-New York, over ethics charges that led to his
> > admonishment
> >http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/26/pelosi-supports-range...
>
>
> > "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote in message
> >news:jb9ff9$v5u$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> > Pelosi stands behind disgraced and Tax Criminal Charlie rangel.
>
> > Washington (CNN) - House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appeared Friday to defend
> > Rep. Charles Rangel, D-New York, over ethics charges that led to his
> > admonishment
>
> Charlie Rangel is not running for president
Neither is Newt. He's just selling books. I hear he's also shopping
> Charlie Rangel is not running for president
for a reality show.
Tim Crowley
Dec 2, 2011, 9:36:06 AM12/2/11
to
"In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and
unreliable
statements were given to the committee".
- Newt Gingrich, January, 1997
The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information
supplied to
investigators represented "intentional or ... reckless" disregard of
House
rules.
unreliable
statements were given to the committee".
- Newt Gingrich, January, 1997
The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information
supplied to
investigators represented "intentional or ... reckless" disregard of
House
rules.
And you're proud of that?
Face it, the GOP doesn't have a candidate. The folks who might have a
chance have no support from the rabid right wing of the party. The
folks the rabid right support can't tie their own shoes. 4 more
years. And the GOP is handing it to him on a platter.
Bradley K. Sherman
Dec 2, 2011, 9:35:17 AM12/2/11
to
The first time in the history of the United States:
|
| House Reprimands, Penalizes Speaker
|
| By John E. Yang
| Washington Post Staff Writer
| Wednesday, January 22 1997; Page A01
|
| 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.
| ...
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/govt/leadership/stories/012297.htm>
Newt Gingrich is a stain on the fabric of our country.
--bks
|
| House Reprimands, Penalizes Speaker
|
| By John E. Yang
| Washington Post Staff Writer
| Wednesday, January 22 1997; Page A01
|
| 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.
| ...
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/govt/leadership/stories/012297.htm>
Newt Gingrich is a stain on the fabric of our country.
--bks
Uncle Steve
Dec 2, 2011, 9:43:47 AM12/2/11
to
about his marrage problems and House record?
Regards,
Uncle Steve
--
We can't all be intelligent, but at least we can be polite.
-- H. J. Paton, "The Modern Predicament"
Bradley K. Sherman
Dec 2, 2011, 9:49:58 AM12/2/11
to
Uncle Steve <stev...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> |
>> | House Reprimands, Penalizes Speaker
>> |
>> | By John E. Yang
>> | Washington Post Staff Writer
>> | Wednesday, January 22 1997; Page A01
>> |
>> | 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.
>> | ...
><http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/govt/leadership/stories/012297.htm>
>
>> |
>> | House Reprimands, Penalizes Speaker
>> |
>> | By John E. Yang
>> | Washington Post Staff Writer
>> | Wednesday, January 22 1997; Page A01
>> |
>> | 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.
>> | ...
><http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/govt/leadership/stories/012297.htm>
>
>You mean a stain on Usenet now that the chuckleheads keeps spamming
>about his marrage problems and House record?
I should think his personal and professional life are reasonable topics
>about his marrage problems and House record?
considering he's running for President of the United States. What
do you want to talk about, the time he spent as a shill for the
financial industry?
--bks
M.I. Wakefield
Dec 2, 2011, 9:53:35 AM12/2/11
to
"Richard Steel" wrote in message
news:5cb9a91c-a90b-420b...@v5g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> So, Newt was fined $300,000.00 for teaching an American History
> Class...WHICH WAS COMPLETELY LEGAL.
news:5cb9a91c-a90b-420b...@v5g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
> So, Newt was fined $300,000.00 for teaching an American History
> Class...WHICH WAS COMPLETELY LEGAL.
Sid9
Dec 2, 2011, 10:08:31 AM12/2/11
to
"Dånk 42Ø" <da...@nugget.org> wrote in message
news:-qydnaXDcKT160XT...@earthlink.com...
.
.
Bottom line: Republicans don't have a viable candidate.
Uncle Steve
Dec 2, 2011, 10:18:39 AM12/2/11
to
clearly pertinent to his hypothetical suitability as POTUS. Much more
pertinent would be an analysis of Republican policies, their practical
value and their individual placement within the strategic plan of
their whole party. The yellow media simply don't have the firepower
to do the level of analysis that I would prefer; they cater mostly to
the lunchbox crowd and true believers.
The Repubs obviously have a multi-generational strategy, as do the
Dems. What have they actually done over the last hundred years,
besides turn America into a declining power, beholden mostly to large
industrial concerns, and with a population largely sliding towards
notional unity with the concept of the Ugly American.
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 2, 2011, 10:24:30 AM12/2/11
to
"Tim Crowley" <timmyt...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:380f2b11-0cb3-40e8...@c18g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
That's strange since Obama is losing to Newt.
By Rasmussen Reports
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
The Newt Gingrich surge has moved him to the top of the polls in Iowa, big
gains in New Hampshire and now a two-point edge over President Obama in a
hypothetical general election match-up.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of Likely Voters finds
Gingrich attracting 45% of the vote while President Obama earns support from
43%. Six percent (6%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are
undecided. (To see survey question wording, click here.)
Last week, Gingrich trailed the president by six. Two weeks ago, he was
down by twelve. Earlier in the year, both Rick Perry and Herman Cain
followed a similar path to take a slight lead over the president. However,
in both cases, their time as frontrunners quickly came to an end. Neither
man led the president more than a single time in a Rasmussen Reports poll.
It remains to be seen whether Gingrich follows that path or is able to
retain his status as the leading alternative to former Massachusetts
Governor Mitt Romney.
Read more:
http://nation.foxnews.com/newt-gingrich/2011/11/30/national-poll-gingrich-45-obama-43#ixzz1fOJvttRe
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 2, 2011, 10:25:04 AM12/2/11
to
"Tim Crowley" <timmyt...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:380f2b11-0cb3-40e8...@c18g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
Gingrich faced some 84 ethics complaints; they were leveled mostly by House
Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his
blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one of
those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
He paid $300,000 for the cost of investigating the final complaint - whether
Gingrich's college course had violated federal tax law - as part of an
agreement with House ethics investigators. Led by Republicans, the ethics
committee never reached a conclusion about that allegation. And the IRS
Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his
blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one of
those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
He paid $300,000 for the cost of investigating the final complaint - whether
Gingrich's college course had violated federal tax law - as part of an
agreement with House ethics investigators. Led by Republicans, the ethics
cleared the organizations connected with the course of any tax violations.
http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/05/former_house_speaker_newt_ging.html
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 2, 2011, 10:26:03 AM12/2/11
to
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 2, 2011, 10:26:26 AM12/2/11
to
news:f3dc33f5-f004-41e4...@q16g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>
Gingrich faced some 84 ethics complaints; they were leveled mostly by House
Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his
blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one of
those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
He paid $300,000 for the cost of investigating the final complaint - whether
Gingrich's college course had violated federal tax law - as part of an
agreement with House ethics investigators. Led by Republicans, the ethics
committee never reached a conclusion about that allegation. And the IRS
cleared the organizations connected with the course of any tax violations.
http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/05/former_house_speaker_newt_ging.html
Gingrich faced some 84 ethics complaints; they were leveled mostly by House
Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his
blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one of
those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
He paid $300,000 for the cost of investigating the final complaint - whether
Gingrich's college course had violated federal tax law - as part of an
agreement with House ethics investigators. Led by Republicans, the ethics
committee never reached a conclusion about that allegation. And the IRS
cleared the organizations connected with the course of any tax violations.
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 2, 2011, 10:25:33 AM12/2/11
to
"M.I. Wakefield" <none@present> wrote in message
Gingrich faced some 84 ethics complaints; they were leveled mostly by House
Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his
blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one of
those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
He paid $300,000 for the cost of investigating the final complaint - whether
Gingrich's college course had violated federal tax law - as part of an
agreement with House ethics investigators. Led by Republicans, the ethics
cleared the organizations connected with the course of any tax violations.
http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/05/former_house_speaker_newt_ging.html
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 2, 2011, 10:25:51 AM12/2/11
to
news:27ade03a-dc7d-490c...@g21g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
Sid9
Dec 2, 2011, 10:39:44 AM12/2/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
wrote in message news:056Cq.4347$U16...@newsfe15.iad...
He was not charge with tax fraud, although that might be a good idea.
M.I. Wakefield
Dec 2, 2011, 10:52:51 AM12/2/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" wrote in message
news:i66Cq.1686$cG....@newsfe14.iad...
You can keep reposting your spin story, but nothing beats your boy's own
words.
news:i66Cq.1686$cG....@newsfe14.iad...
You can keep reposting your spin story, but nothing beats your boy's own
words.
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 2, 2011, 10:55:13 AM12/2/11
to
news:jbarg3$8on$1...@dont-email.me...
WASHINGTON (February 3) -- The Internal Revenue Service Wednesday cleared
former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of an alleged tax law violation in
connection with a controversial college course he taught.
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/03/gingrich/
>
IRS clears Newt Gingrich's college course
By Brooks Jackson/CNN
February 3, 1999
Newt Gingrich
IRS clears Newt Gingrich's college course
By Brooks Jackson/CNN
February 3, 1999
WASHINGTON (February 3) -- The Internal Revenue Service Wednesday cleared
former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of an alleged tax law violation in
connection with a controversial college course he taught.
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1999/02/03/gingrich/
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 2, 2011, 10:55:33 AM12/2/11
to
Richard Steel
Dec 2, 2011, 11:47:47 AM12/2/11
to
On Dec 2, 6:36 am, Tim Crowley <timmyturm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 1, 9:35 pm, Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > And the IRS
>
> > > > cleared the organizations connected with the course of any tax violations.
> > > >http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/05/former_house_speaker_...
> > > Congress neither reversed their conviction nor the $300,000.00 fine.
> > > They stand.
>
> > So, Newt was fined $300,000.00 for teaching an American History
> > Class...WHICH WAS COMPLETELY LEGAL.
>
> > And you're proud of that?
>
> "In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and
> unreliable
> statements were given to the committee".
> - Newt Gingrich, January, 1997
> The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information
> supplied to
> investigators represented "intentional or ... reckless" disregard of
> House
> rules.
> And you're proud of that?
And this was about what? 15 year ago, Gingrich wasn't transparent
> On Dec 1, 9:35 pm, Richard Steel <rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > And the IRS
>
> > > > cleared the organizations connected with the course of any tax violations.
> > > >http://www.mlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2011/05/former_house_speaker_...
> > > Congress neither reversed their conviction nor the $300,000.00 fine.
> > > They stand.
>
> > So, Newt was fined $300,000.00 for teaching an American History
> > Class...WHICH WAS COMPLETELY LEGAL.
>
> > And you're proud of that?
>
> "In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and
> unreliable
> statements were given to the committee".
> - Newt Gingrich, January, 1997
> The House Ethics Committee concluded that inaccurate information
> supplied to
> investigators represented "intentional or ... reckless" disregard of
> House
> rules.
> And you're proud of that?
enough about his teaching a college course?
Meanwhile, on Wednesday, the Obama administration sealed the court
records of murdered border agent Brian Terry.
Obama greenlite an operation that gave thousands of Mexican drug
cartels thousands of military grade semiautomatic weapons, which
resulted in the death of one American border guard, and three hundred
innocent Mexicans.
Obama and his administration have lied, stonewalled, pretty much every
step of the way.
Go ahead. Bring up the fact that the Democrats condemned Newt for
teaching a college course. It gives the GOP every opportunity to
remind Ameican at the standards Republicans are held to, vs. what
Obama, Pelosi, and Reid have gotten away with.
> Face it, the GOP doesn't have a candidate. The folks who might have a
> chance have no support from the rabid right wing of the party. The
> folks the rabid right support can't tie their own shoes. 4 more
> years. And the GOP is handing it to him on a platter.
SUCCESS TO POINT TO?
While you assholes are babbling about Newt's ethics of TEACHING AN
ANMERICAN HISTORY CLASS, here's what Former House Speaker Gingrich
will be discussing?
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/12/barack-obama-to-donors-im-going-to-need-another-term-to-finish-the-job/
Richard Steel
Dec 2, 2011, 11:49:12 AM12/2/11
to
> news:5cb9a91c-a90b-420b...@v5g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
>
> > So, Newt was fined $300,000.00 for teaching an American History
> > Class...WHICH WAS COMPLETELY LEGAL.
> "In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable
> statements were given to the committee".
300+ dead.
Obama's sealed the court records of murdered American border agent.
And you're babbling about teaching a college course.
Sid9
Dec 2, 2011, 11:56:15 AM12/2/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
and fined $300,000.00 nearly unanimously.
He was not charged by the IRS.
Therefore your post is pure bullshit and irrelevant
Sid9
Dec 2, 2011, 11:56:37 AM12/2/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
wrote in message news:t56Cq.726$Ph7...@newsfe09.iad...
>
>
Sid9
Dec 2, 2011, 11:56:49 AM12/2/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
Sid9
Dec 2, 2011, 11:57:01 AM12/2/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
Sid9
Dec 2, 2011, 11:57:47 AM12/2/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
M.I. Wakefield
Dec 2, 2011, 12:01:33 PM12/2/11
to
"Richard Steel" wrote in message
news:1dcad303-69db-4706...@x7g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
Sid9
Dec 2, 2011, 12:03:46 PM12/2/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
Sid9
Dec 2, 2011, 12:03:26 PM12/2/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" <Obama's Shit Stain on America @ white House.gov>
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 2, 2011, 10:04:36 PM12/2/11
to
news:jbb052$7k9$4...@dont-email.me...
>
>
You know you were smeared by Democraps when the IRS Clears you from any
wrongdoing!
>
>
You know you were smeared by Democraps when the IRS Clears you from any
wrongdoing!
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 2, 2011, 10:04:51 PM12/2/11
to
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 2, 2011, 10:05:00 PM12/2/11
to
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 2, 2011, 10:05:33 PM12/2/11
to
news:jbb0dl$a1n$1...@dont-email.me...
You know you were smeared by Democraps when the IRS Clears you from any
wrongdoing!
You know you were smeared by Democraps when the IRS Clears you from any
wrongdoing!
Shit Stain on America @whitehouse.gov ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS
Dec 2, 2011, 10:05:52 PM12/2/11
to
"M.I. Wakefield" <none@present> wrote in message
M.I. Wakefield
Dec 2, 2011, 10:12:56 PM12/2/11
to
"ØBAMAGGOT OCCUTARDS" wrote in message
news:%lgCq.2872$Ph7....@newsfe09.iad...
Snip!
> You know you were smeared by Democraps when the IRS Clears you from any
> wrongdoing!
Dånk 42Ø
Dec 3, 2011, 12:28:49 AM12/3/11
to
On 12/02/2011 08:08 AM, Sid9 wrote:
> Bottom line: Republicans don't have a viable candidate.
By "viable," you mean they don't have a candidate with the cultlike
charisma of Chairman Obama.
Barack Obama is lucky: Like Jesus, he has a convenient thirty-year gap
in his life story, meaning there are no bimbos to come back to haunt
him. As a young politician who skyrocketed from state senator to the
national presidency in just a decade, he has no political record that
can be held against him. And he's got this whole Kool-Aid Kult thing
going on for him.
Actually, Ron Paul is an EXTREMELY viable candidate, which is why the
Democrap-controlled media refuse to acknowledge his existence. If the
media do mention him at all, they are sure to sandwich the mention
between one story about a pedophile serial killer and another on a
nuclear meltdown.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
"In the months preceding the [Mexico 1994] elections, Televisa gave most
of its airtime to the Zedillo campaign. Meanwhile, it equated coverage
of Zedillo's main rivals, the center-right National Action Party (PAN)
and the center-left Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD), with that
of some half a dozen minuscule parties, many of which had been created
by the government for the purpose of splitting the legitimate opposition
vote."
"What was even more telling was the amount of time that Televisa was
giving to tiny political parties, most of which were financed by the
government and had never won more than 1% of the vote in a national
election. Televisa's top news program had devoted more time to each of
the candidates of the Green Environmental Party of Mexico (PVEM), the
Mexican Democratic Party (PDM), and the Authentic Party of the Mexican
Revolution (PARM) than to [Cuauhtémoc] Cárdenas [PRD] or Fernández de
Cavallos [PAN]. If you watched Televisa without knowing much about
Mexico, you would have concluded that any of the three small parties was
more important than Cárdenas' PRD, which according to government critics
had won as many votes as Salinas -- if not more -- in the murky 1988
presidential elections."
-- Andres Oppenheimer, "Bordering on Chaos" (1996)
> Bottom line: Republicans don't have a viable candidate.
By "viable," you mean they don't have a candidate with the cultlike
charisma of Chairman Obama.
Barack Obama is lucky: Like Jesus, he has a convenient thirty-year gap
in his life story, meaning there are no bimbos to come back to haunt
him. As a young politician who skyrocketed from state senator to the
national presidency in just a decade, he has no political record that
can be held against him. And he's got this whole Kool-Aid Kult thing
going on for him.
Actually, Ron Paul is an EXTREMELY viable candidate, which is why the
Democrap-controlled media refuse to acknowledge his existence. If the
media do mention him at all, they are sure to sandwich the mention
between one story about a pedophile serial killer and another on a
nuclear meltdown.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
"In the months preceding the [Mexico 1994] elections, Televisa gave most
of its airtime to the Zedillo campaign. Meanwhile, it equated coverage
of Zedillo's main rivals, the center-right National Action Party (PAN)
and the center-left Party of the Democratic Revolution (PRD), with that
of some half a dozen minuscule parties, many of which had been created
by the government for the purpose of splitting the legitimate opposition
vote."
"What was even more telling was the amount of time that Televisa was
giving to tiny political parties, most of which were financed by the
government and had never won more than 1% of the vote in a national
election. Televisa's top news program had devoted more time to each of
the candidates of the Green Environmental Party of Mexico (PVEM), the
Mexican Democratic Party (PDM), and the Authentic Party of the Mexican
Revolution (PARM) than to [Cuauhtémoc] Cárdenas [PRD] or Fernández de
Cavallos [PAN]. If you watched Televisa without knowing much about
Mexico, you would have concluded that any of the three small parties was
more important than Cárdenas' PRD, which according to government critics
had won as many votes as Salinas -- if not more -- in the murky 1988
presidential elections."
-- Andres Oppenheimer, "Bordering on Chaos" (1996)
Bradley K. Sherman
Dec 3, 2011, 12:31:32 AM12/3/11
to
In article <BpmdnStmYeEJLkTT...@earthlink.com>,
Dånk 42Ø <da...@nugget.org> wrote:
> ...
Ron Paul has been outstanding in the debates but his problem
is *not* with the Democrats:
|
| The Republican Jewish Coalition declined to invite Rep. Ron
| Paul (R-Texas) to its presidential candidates forum next
| Wednesday in Washington, citing his "misguided and extreme
| views."
|
| RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks said Paul was not
| invited because the organization rejects his views. "He's
| just so far outside of the mainstream of the Republican
| party and this organization," he told Washington Jewish
| Week, adding that inviting him would be like inviting
| President Barack Obama.
| ...
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/02/ron-paul-republican-jewish-coalition-israel_n_1126326.html>
--bks
Dånk 42Ø <da...@nugget.org> wrote:
> ...
>Actually, Ron Paul is an EXTREMELY viable candidate, which is why the
>Democrap-controlled media refuse to acknowledge his existence. If the
> ...
>Democrap-controlled media refuse to acknowledge his existence. If the
Ron Paul has been outstanding in the debates but his problem
is *not* with the Democrats:
|
| The Republican Jewish Coalition declined to invite Rep. Ron
| Paul (R-Texas) to its presidential candidates forum next
| Wednesday in Washington, citing his "misguided and extreme
| views."
|
| RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks said Paul was not
| invited because the organization rejects his views. "He's
| just so far outside of the mainstream of the Republican
| party and this organization," he told Washington Jewish
| Week, adding that inviting him would be like inviting
| President Barack Obama.
| ...
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/02/ron-paul-republican-jewish-coalition-israel_n_1126326.html>
--bks
Message has been deleted
*us*
Dec 3, 2011, 5:55:12 AM12/3/11
to
On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 22:04:36 -0500, MAGGOTTARD <ShitStain...@teabagot.con> wrote:
>... any
>wrongdoing!
It's okay with you if your neocon idols commit war crimes.
>On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 01:27:07 +0000 (UTC), b...@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:
>>The first and only Speaker formally reprimanded by the House of
>>Representatives. For ethics violations! A national disgrace
>>named "Newt Gingrich."
>>
>>Even patriotic conservatives loathe him:
>><http://www.verumserum.com/?p=34603>
>... any
>wrongdoing!
It's okay with you if your neocon idols commit war crimes.
>On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 01:27:07 +0000 (UTC), b...@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:
>>The first and only Speaker formally reprimanded by the House of
>>Representatives. For ethics violations! A national disgrace
>>named "Newt Gingrich."
>>
>>Even patriotic conservatives loathe him:
>><http://www.verumserum.com/?p=34603>
*us*
Dec 3, 2011, 6:00:47 AM12/3/11
to
On Fri, 02 Dec 2011 22:51:02 -0700, Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 22:04:36 -0500, MAGGOTTARD <ShitStain...@neo.con> wrote:
>> You know you were smeared...
>
>Clinton exonerated in phoney impeachment
>
>SNICKER
Did you know Clinton served his wife with divorce
papers when she was seriously ill in the hospital?
Oh, wait, I take that back ...
>On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 22:04:36 -0500, MAGGOTTARD <ShitStain...@neo.con> wrote:
>> You know you were smeared...
>
>Clinton exonerated in phoney impeachment
>
>SNICKER
Did you know Clinton served his wife with divorce
papers when she was seriously ill in the hospital?
Oh, wait, I take that back ...
*us*
Dec 3, 2011, 6:00:47 AM12/3/11
to
On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 22:04:51 -0500, MAGGOTTARD <ShitStain...@neo.con> wrote:
>...craps when...
Try to avoid your keyboard with that.
>On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 11:57:47 -0500, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>Gingrich was charged with ethics violations by the House and found guilty
>>and fined $300,000.00 nearly unanimously.
>>He was not charged by the IRS.
>>Therefore your post is pure bullshit and irrelevant
Exactly.
>...craps when...
Try to avoid your keyboard with that.
>On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 11:57:47 -0500, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>Gingrich was charged with ethics violations by the House and found guilty
>>and fined $300,000.00 nearly unanimously.
>>He was not charged by the IRS.
>>Therefore your post is pure bullshit and irrelevant
*us*
Dec 3, 2011, 6:06:12 AM12/3/11
to
On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 22:05:00 -0500, MAGGOTTARD <ShitStain...@neo.con> wrote:
>You know ...
Why don't you know that Newt Gingrich isn't the Messiah?
>You know ...
Why don't you know that Newt Gingrich isn't the Messiah?
*us*
Dec 3, 2011, 6:06:49 AM12/3/11
to
On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 22:05:33 -0500, MAGGOTTARD <ShitStain...@neo.con> wrote:
>Newt Gingrich
Why do you kneel and lick his boots?
>Newt Gingrich
Why do you kneel and lick his boots?
*us*
Dec 3, 2011, 6:16:25 AM12/3/11
to
On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 22:05:52 -0500, MAGGOTTARD <ShitStain...@neo.con> wrote:
>...Newt Gingrich's ...
He's your Messiah, isn't he.
http://realdealtalk.com/2010/09/20/newt-gingrich-smear-merchant-for-the-extreme-right/
>...Newt Gingrich's ...
He's your Messiah, isn't he.
http://realdealtalk.com/2010/09/20/newt-gingrich-smear-merchant-for-the-extreme-right/
*us*
Dec 3, 2011, 6:16:25 AM12/3/11
to
On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 22:12:56 -0500, "M.I. Wakefield" <none@present> wrote:
>"In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable
>statements were given to the committee".
>
>- Newt Gingrich, January, 1997
Indeed.
>"In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable
>statements were given to the committee".
>
>- Newt Gingrich, January, 1997
Charles Montgomery Burns
Dec 3, 2011, 9:10:46 AM12/3/11
to
On Dec 3, 6:00 am, * US * wrote:
from the public dime for 14 years. It's such a family business that
his son Randy has jumped on the wagon!
Working for the government has become the Paul family business.
True Libertarians who will one day lead us to Ayn Rand's Libertarian
paradise!
> On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 22:04:51 -0500, MAGGOTTARD <ShitStainonAmer...@neo.con> wrote:
> >...craps when...
>
> Try to avoid your keyboard with that.
>
> >On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 11:57:47 -0500, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >>Gingrich was charged with ethics violations by the House and found guilty
> >>and fined $300,000.00 nearly unanimously.
> >>He was not charged by the IRS.
> >>Therefore your post is pure bullshit and irrelevant
>
> Exactly.
Forget Newt. Support Ron Paul. He's a Libertarian who has been fed
> >...craps when...
>
> Try to avoid your keyboard with that.
>
> >On Fri, 2 Dec 2011 11:57:47 -0500, "Sid9" <sid9@ bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >>Gingrich was charged with ethics violations by the House and found guilty
> >>and fined $300,000.00 nearly unanimously.
> >>He was not charged by the IRS.
> >>Therefore your post is pure bullshit and irrelevant
>
> Exactly.
from the public dime for 14 years. It's such a family business that
his son Randy has jumped on the wagon!
Working for the government has become the Paul family business.
True Libertarians who will one day lead us to Ayn Rand's Libertarian
paradise!
Newt'sNemesis
Dec 3, 2011, 10:11:38 AM12/3/11
to
StephenHawking
Dec 3, 2011, 11:26:06 AM12/3/11
to
CAIN's returning to the low-life cesspool whence he came. You know,
where the "folks" don't mind a little ass-grabbin' and casual fuckin'
here and there.
Now he's resigned, maybe we'll hear how many illegitimate kids he's
fathered.
My guess? No less than six.
===========
But Hermsie, you can always go back to Godawful's Pizza!
http://media.timesfreepress.com/img/photos/2011/12/02/111203_Yuck_t618.jpg?ba5b5b122dd3d37cc13d83e92a6a0ec0d5bfa32a
============
AND NEWT "PORKY PIG" GINGRICH HAS A MESSAGE FOR YOU ...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/WashingtonPost/Content/Epaper/2011-12-03/A/15/32.1.3339890202.jpg
where the "folks" don't mind a little ass-grabbin' and casual fuckin'
here and there.
Now he's resigned, maybe we'll hear how many illegitimate kids he's
fathered.
My guess? No less than six.
===========
But Hermsie, you can always go back to Godawful's Pizza!
http://media.timesfreepress.com/img/photos/2011/12/02/111203_Yuck_t618.jpg?ba5b5b122dd3d37cc13d83e92a6a0ec0d5bfa32a
============
AND NEWT "PORKY PIG" GINGRICH HAS A MESSAGE FOR YOU ...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/WashingtonPost/Content/Epaper/2011-12-03/A/15/32.1.3339890202.jpg
*us*
Dec 3, 2011, 1:41:46 PM12/3/11
to
On Sat, 3 Dec 2011 07:11:38 -0800 (PST), "Newt'sNemesis" <slipu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Why not?
>
>http://blogs.sites.post-gazette.com/images/stories/Rob_Rogers/112911_Republican_Ghost.jpg
Ha! Very good.
>Why not?
>
>http://blogs.sites.post-gazette.com/images/stories/Rob_Rogers/112911_Republican_Ghost.jpg
Ha! Very good.
*us*
Dec 3, 2011, 1:41:46 PM12/3/11
to
*us*
Dec 3, 2011, 1:41:46 PM12/3/11
to
On Sat, 3 Dec 2011 06:10:46 -0800 (PST), Charles Montgomery Burns <adrast...@live.com>
wrote:
At least he objected to the illegal invasions ...
wrote:
Charles Montgomery Burns
Dec 3, 2011, 1:59:14 PM12/3/11
to
On Dec 3, 1:41 pm, * US * wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Dec 2011 06:10:46 -0800 (PST), Charles Montgomery Burns <adrastea2...@live.com>
I'm glad that the Minutemen were sitting at the border of Montana and
Alberta, fearing how those pesky Canucks would invade to enjoy the
great life in Montana as opposed to Alberta, the pinnacle of the North
American economy, supreme in its resources and average GDP per capita.
Some say that the Albertans were coming to Montana like Mexicans!
But I guess that was only because the Government Controlled CBC banned
Fox News.
> On Sat, 3 Dec 2011 06:10:46 -0800 (PST), Charles Montgomery Burns <adrastea2...@live.com>
Alberta, fearing how those pesky Canucks would invade to enjoy the
great life in Montana as opposed to Alberta, the pinnacle of the North
American economy, supreme in its resources and average GDP per capita.
Some say that the Albertans were coming to Montana like Mexicans!
But I guess that was only because the Government Controlled CBC banned
Fox News.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages