Commentaries, Global Warming, Opinions   Cover   •   Commentary   •   Books & Reviews   •   Climate Change   •   Site Links   •   Feedback
"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." - John 8:32
WEBCommentary Contributor
Author:  Michael J. Gaynor
Bio: Michael J. Gaynor
Date:  November 18, 2011
Print article - Printer friendly version

Email article link to friend(s) - Email a link to this article to friends

Facebook - Facebook

Topic category:  Government/Politics

Morris and McCann Can't Save the Gingrich Campaign

The Republican Party won't be nominating Jim Johnson, Jamie Gorelick or Rahm Emanuel, and it should not nominate their fellow paid consultant Gingrich.

On November 17, 2011, Dick Morris and Eileen McCann published "Newt and Freddie Mac," a futile attempt to stop the Gingrich presidential campaign from floundering now that it is well known that his company took more than $1,500,000 in consulting fees from Freddie Mac, beginning in 1999, about five months after the former Speaker of the House resigned.

Morris and McCann dismissed "the charge that [Gingrich] was paid off by Freddie Mac to do their bidding as the company, in concert with Fannie Mae, flooded the world with funny money mortgages and brought on the global collapse of 2008" as a "brickbat[]...aimed at his head."

A brickbat is an uncomplimentary remark.

Gingrich's relationship with Freddie Mac is an admitted fact that reminds people that while they respect Gingrich's intelligence, experience and debating skills (and many of his political positions), they don't trust him.

Morris and McCann began by trying to minimize the amount paid: "According to Bloomberg News, Newt got between $1.6 and $1.8 million in consulting fees from Freddie Mac over eight years - about $17,000 per month - a not unusual fee these days."

"A not unusual fee these days"?

According to Bloomberg, Gingrich was allegedly paid a monthly retainer of $25,000 to $30,000 between 1999 and 2002 for consulting with Freddie Mac executives.

Was $25,000 to $30,000 an "unusual fee" back then?

And what did it buy?

Morris and McCann continued: "Bear in mind that F and F were paying off everybody they could find. Jim Johnson, Mondale's manager, Jamie Gorelick, Clinton's Deputy AG, Rahm Emanuel, and dozens of others made a mint in consulting fees. Newt was not unique."

That's essentially an acknowledgement that Gingrich took a payoff.

NOT presidential!

The Republican Party won't be nominating Jim Johnson, Jamie Gorelick or Rahm Emanuel, and it should not nominate their fellow paid consultant Gingrich.

Morris and McCann opined: "Doubtless Freddie hired [Gingrich] to show that it was not an arm of the Democratic Party and to buy some credibility on the right. His contract started after he left office and there is no evidence that he brought any concrete influence to bear on Freddie's behalf."

Freddie has been an arm of the Democrat Party, which is why Congressional Democrats in the Senate blocked Republican efforts to put Fannie and Freddie under United States Treasury Department supervision.

It is apparent that Gingrich was retained in order to great the illusion that Fannie and Freddie were worthy of bipartisan support.

Let's see the evidence of what Gingrich did for Freddie Mac and not assume instead.

Amazingly, Morris and McCann claimed that this scrutiny gives Newt an incredible opportunity."

They think that "[h]e can produce memos and e mails that show that he warned Freddie about its mortgage policies."

They think so because "[i]n one of the presidential debates, Newt said that he warned Freddie that they were 'creating a bubble' that would burst and have enormous implications when it did."

Morris and McCann: "If Newt can show that he sounded the alarm and had the wisdom and foresight to raise hell about the mortgages, he can put himself in much rarified company. To be exact: alone. Nobody else had that kind of foresight."

IF Gingrich had that foresight--and it was foreseeable that no credit report and adjustable rate mortgages was a catastrophe to come, then Gingrich's failure to blow the whistle would be damning.

Morris and McCann concluded: "This scandal can either hurt or help. But if Newt used his contacts at Freddie to warn them and to try to change the Titanic's course before it hit the iceberg, it could be a good credential for his candidacy."

That's nonsense. This scandal hurts. The question is...how much?

The answer is...too much for him to be nominated.

America won't extol Gingrich if he produces a memo showing that he predicted the financial crisis for Freddie Mac, because he didn't do what was needed in the circumstances.

America is not celebrating the man who told Coach Joe Paterno what he saw in the shower but not the police.

America won't cheer if Gingrich shows that he foresaw doom, but only told Freddie Mac executives.

Whatever the truth about the scope of Gingrich's foresight is, Gingrich's willingness to take the consulting fees exemplifies the kind of opportunism we don't want in our Presidents.

Conservative commentators who excuse Gingrich's failings as minor compared to Bill Clinton's transgressions and the lies of Obama and the corruption of his Administration miss the main point: we need a competent President whom the American people can respect.

Michael J. Gaynor

Send email feedback to Michael J. Gaynor


Biography - Michael J. Gaynor

Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member.

Gaynor graduated magna cum laude, with Honors in Social Science, from Hofstra University's New College, and received his J.D. degree from St. John's Law School, where he won the American Jurisprudence Award in Evidence and served as an editor of the Law Review and the St. Thomas More Institute for Legal Research. He wrote on the Pentagon Papers case for the Review and obscenity law for The Catholic Lawyer and edited the Law Review's commentary on significant developments in New York law.

The day after graduating, Gaynor joined the Fulton firm, where he focused on litigation and corporate law. In 1997 Gaynor and Emily Bass formed Gaynor & Bass and then conducted a general legal practice, emphasizing litigation, and represented corporations, individuals and a New York City labor union. Notably, Gaynor & Bass prevailed in the Second Circuit in a seminal copyright infringement case, Tasini v. New York Times, against newspaper and magazine publishers and Lexis-Nexis. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed, 7 to 2, holding that the copyrights of freelance writers had been infringed when their work was put online without permission or compensation.

Gaynor currently contributes regularly to www.MichNews.com, www.RenewAmerica.com, www.WebCommentary.com, www.PostChronicle.com and www.therealitycheck.org and has contributed to many other websites. He has written extensively on political and religious issues, notably the Terry Schiavo case, the Duke "no rape" case, ACORN and canon law, and appeared as a guest on television and radio. He was acknowledged in Until Proven Innocent, by Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson, and Culture of Corruption, by Michelle Malkin. He appeared on "Your World With Cavuto" to promote an eBay boycott that he initiated and "The World Over With Raymond Arroyo" (EWTN) to discuss the legal implications of the Schiavo case. On October 22, 2008, Gaynor was the first to report that The New York Times had killed an Obama/ACORN expose on which a Times reporter had been working with ACORN whistleblower Anita MonCrief.

Gaynor's email address is gaynormike@aol.com.


Read other commentaries by Michael J. Gaynor.

Copyright 2011 by Michael J. Gaynor
All Rights Reserved.

[ Back ]


© 2004-2017 by WEBCommentary(tm), All Rights Reserved