AP Photo/Susan Walsh
President Clinton is sworn in for his second term by Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist during the 53rd Presidential Inauguration Monday, Jan. 20, 1997, in Washington. House Speaker Newt Gingrich and his second wife Marianne are in the background (she is directly behind Clinton's head in the photo).
As hard as he tries, Newt Gingrich cannot bury the past.
In an exclusive interview with ABC News' "Nightline" scheduled to air tonight, the GOP presidential candidate's second ex-wife says she refused to go along with the idea that she share her husband with Callista Bisek, who would later become his third wife.
The interview will air just two days before the presidential primary in Christian conservative South Carolina, where Gingrich is trying to present himself as the strongest alternative to front-runner Mitt Romney.
It is also a reminder of the monumental hypocrisy Gingrich practiced in the late 1990's.
While carrying on with Bisek, Gingrich, as House Speaker, was putting the country through the ringer with a consuming, divisive and distracting attempt to impeach President Bill Clinton and remove him from office for his affair with Monica Lewinsky.
Here's a brief chronology: In 1993, Newt and Marianne Gingrich had been married a dozen years when he began an affair with Callista Bisek, a House staffer who was 23 years his junior.
At roughly the same time (1995-97), President Clinton conducted an affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Clinton denied the affair in January 1998 during a deposition in the Paula Jones sexual harassment civil case, but admitted it in August 1998 when DNA evidence from a stained blue-dress emerged.
The House, with Gingrich as Speaker, wasted little time in trying to remove Clinton from office. By Dec. 19, 1998, Clinton had become only the second U.S. president to be impeached by the House of Representatives (on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice).
While Clinton survived a Senate trial and completed his term of office with generally high job-approval ratings, the impeachment process, various ethics violations and historic losses in the 1998 midterms had taken a huge toll on Gingrich's political career.
Facing a rebellion in the Republican caucus, Gingrich announced that he would step down as Speaker and leave the House (which he did on Jan. 3, 1999).
Five months after that, on May 11, 1999, Marianne Gingrich told The Washington Post that her husband called her mother's home and requested a divorce.
The couple saw a counselor for four weeks, during which time Marianne said her husband asked for an “open marriage” so that he could continue to see whoever he wanted. When Marianne Gingrich refused, the marriage was over.
The divorce was finalized on April 6, 2000. Newt Gingrich married Bisek four months later on Aug. 18, 2000.
Gingrich would argue in 2007 that the Clinton case was different from his personal transgressions.
"The president of the United States got in trouble for committing a felony in front of a sitting federal judge," he said, arguing that Clinton had "deliberately committed perjury."
But many would argue that the independent counsel had no business questioning a sitting president for for acts done before taking office and unrelated to the office (remember Clinton v. Jones?).
And even so, before, during and affair the Clinton impeachment, Gingrich constantly espoused family values and linked his party to wholesome family values. In fact, he gave a speech with those themes the day after asking Marianne for a divorce!
Leave a Comment:
lets see how to diligently put this, @!$%# NEWT GINGRICH!
Just for the record. I am a Catholic, and if Newt was married in a church to either of his ex wives. He would have to go through the annulment process with the Catholic Church inorder to get married to a Catholic in a Catholic Church. If he has not done this, then his marriage is a mockery to the Catholic Church. And both him and his wife would be considered adulters.
Gingrich was not a Catholic when he married Calista... He converted to Catholicism at Calista's insistence. At some time during the conversion process, this matter was supposedly addressed, probably with copious amounts of cash changing hands, leaving Newt and Calista in the good graces of the Church...
... And they lived happily ever after. The End?.....
Yes, it is only the regular people with out any cash to cross the hands of the priest, or the church that can buy your way into "Special Treatment". Hey, I'm not Catholic and I don't care....but like I say, I'm not passing myself off as Catholic. Nor, am I running for an office, like the presidency.
She probably wanted him to convert so she wouldn't have to be on a national network news show in a few years explaining why SHE wasn't interested in a three way, leading to a divorce.
Let me get this straight. Republicans supposedly, conservative Christians who above all else, follow the "Ten Commandments." If this is the case, why are they so forgiving of Mitt or Newt? Are they so afraid, of a man who loves his wife; who worked very hard, to get an education; who has tried to get the economy, on the up-swing, (despite the "Party of NO!); who saved the auto industry;( Despite the party of NO!)and so many other positive issues? Tell me, which one of the Republican candidates, can claim any of those accomplishments? Which one of those Republican candidates, have ever provided a hard days work? Which one of those Republican candidates, actually have the skill, the fortitude, the intelligence or the wisdom, to deserve your vote? The answer is obvious, President Obama! He answers all the "Christian values" the Republican conservatives, want in a candidate. The only reason anyone would vote for another person is, they hate Democrats, the are afraid to admit a black man is, more qualified to be president, than the combined line-up of Republican or he is a capable leader, of our great nation.
OBAMA/BIDEN 2012
He is very hypocritical. I feel he needs to drop out after being expelled from the Senate for violations .
There's your phony 'christian family values' teabagger party. Hope 'lil newtie does'nt bow out of the race, he reminds the people in this country every day what hypocrites, liars and how corrupt the teabagger party actually is.
Newt Gingrich is a coward. I heard on our news , when ask about it he said "He wasn't getting into it, to ask his kids. Well for me that's cowards way out. Man up Newt, you chastised President Clinton and you were having hankie pankie to! For me if my husband ask me to have open marriage iI would of did same thing his wife did. Family values are"nt part of that campaign for sure !!!
Hi Pam~ And what does that make Callista, who was willing to just carry on the affair and share him with his wife?? She'd make a great First Lady wouldn't she? Except she wouldn't be first and I don't think we could call her a lady.
Ruth #2, I, too, would like to know if he's had an annulment.
Well, he wont get far with his ex wife out to "newter" him on national TV.
Family values, Pam? Right. Where DID that go?
Sweet revenge. Bet when he gave her his walking papers he never thought she would get in the last punch.
I love how she also said he was not fit to be president. She should know.
Yes he should apologize but he won't. he hasn't even apologized for his most raciest comments. He is to pompous and arrogant.
.
hey ed have you beaten you wife lately! hipocrite!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ED is our HOST
You are just a rude guest.
@
That is the best you have?
The right wing must be stroking out at the thought that the election is slipping further away every time any republican opens his or her mouth.
It is a target rich environment ryoushi. LOL!
Let's see ----It was ok for him to investigate & condemn Clinton's affair with Lewinski, and he's against Gay marriages. However it's ok for him to have been having an affair while investigating Clinton and he wanted an "open marriage" - wife and mistress. What a hypocrite.
yea but clinton was pres. at that time getting his co#$ sucked in the oval office,he shamed this country........
He shamed himself. Not this country. We were not guilty. You are shamful for bringing it to this sight. It was not ok for newt, and it certainly wan't of for Clinton......Audultry is Audultry.....I think they are both even now.
Oh please! Gingrich might not have been in the Oval Office, but he was getting it everywhere else in D.C. And then had the guts to try to get Clinton impeached! Reps are the biggest hypocrites around, all the while hiding behind "Family Values"! By the way Newt was getting his BJ in his driveway by the wife of one of his staffers. So go tell it to someone else deacon.
His daughter were also in the drive way and someone knew what was going on and removed his two daughter from the sight. Very protective of his own children?
ahhh feelings hurt
deacon,
i hope you see that Clinton's affair was a personal one, and none of our business. just as gingrich's affairs are personal, until he starts throwing mud at someone else. this is the problem with the republican party, using god and family values as a "prop", all the while doing things behind closed doors that are worse than anything the democrats have done (not that i am taking sides).
your moniker, "the deacon" would suggest that you might be a little more conservative in your description of what took place in the oval office.
suzette the pres. represents the USA so his actions are not private...
and my moniker is THE deacon not A deacon... but it is my THEME..
Which is worse, the president having an affair or a 'family values' politican slobbering at the mouth to have him impeached while having his OWN affairs?
Thankful Mom~His daughters have been defending him. I wonder if they knew what he was doing when they walked past that day, if they would be so supportive?
deacon,
lets be clear.
you are saying that because Clinton was President, that the repubs had every RIGHT to OUT him, to impeach him.
you are saying that newt gingrich, Bob Livingston, Larry "wide stance", soliciting sex from an undercover cop in a minneapolis airport bathroom" craig (google "chris matthews/larry craig/clinton impeachment") had every right to comment openly about Clinton's affair when they were all doing the same thing, or WORSE, themselves.
you are saying that newt gingrich, bob livingston and larry craig, and others who were having affairs, as members of congress do not represent the USA.
THAT is your justification?
John,
the repubs wanted every blow-by-blow.
i am sure you remember Larry Flynt's (hustler) involvement in this-requesting information from people regarding repubs who were currently having affairs while trying to bring Clinton down.
Flynt outed bob livingston, who hoped to be the next speaker of the house after the repubs accomplished their mission of booting President Clinton from office. Flynt did the same thing to repubs that they were doing to President Clinton. he had the names of other repubs who were also having affairs, but outed only livingston.
i've always appreciated Flynt's participation in saving Clinton by outing a hypocritical republican.
the impeachmetn of President Clinton is a prime example of how out-of-touch the repubs are; the lengths they will go to to bring someone down, even while doing the very same things, or worse, themselves.
MJB,
children are very forgiving of their parents.
i am sure his children would love for their dad to be president.
my guess is that they know, even if they didn't know it at the time, they surely found out about it later. they may even have been old enough for their mother to share it with them, right or wrong.
MJB, His daughter, are his daughters. They also work for him. So that doesn't prove anything. Just allegiance to a father. If they are aware, they don't want to be.
In the case of his daughters being on the scene with his aid. The aid had the good sence to realize what was going on between leroy and the female, and removed the children.
No, Clinton shamed himself! The Presidency lives through.
Remember the criminal regime of bush/cheney/rumsfeld/ashcroft, and on and on. Now that was/is a scandal.
Gee is Peyton place still alive and well as even as the right tears up the constitution?
IOKIYAR
What happens in there private life is there business. But Newt condemned Clinton for it president or not it his life Newt is running for president, he was the speaker of the house number three in line for the pres at that time. He's no better than Clinton. Besides that sounds like the deacon is jealous
Liberals said that Bill Clinton's indescressions were not important, and had nothing to do with being President. Well, although I will not vote for Newt unless he is the nominee, like Bill Clinton, this is a non-issue !
Move along people, there is nothing here !
Hypocrisy! A man's character is in question when running for President.
LMAO! Yeah, kinda like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5NNOrp_83RU
Believe me I am not one of those holding the bible in the air screaming you are living in sin but why would Marianne Gingrich give an interview 2 days before the primary. I hope she really did not think those racists in South Carolina would care, did she? All of that talk about religion and then say stuff like putting an African American journalist in his place and food stamp president; they loved what this man was saying. The people in South Carolina and Newt Gingrich are just a bunch of hypocrites. I feel Marianne Gingrich is trying to get forgiveness. People on earth will not be the ones to let her in those gates in heaven. After all she was having an affair with a man whose wife was suffering from cancer and getting treatment at that time. I thought she was really going to say something off the wall. Whatever he told the second Mrs. Gingrich to have affair with her before leaving his first wife, he just tried out a new line on her. So, second Mrs. Gingrich your story is one that falls flat. All we know he maybe trying to find a 4th Mrs. Gingrich. What is the old saying? You will lose him the same way you got him. Marianne and Callista knew Newt was married before they took up with this fool. At least that was not the story with Hermann Cain and the woman in Atlanta. She knew he was married and did not think he was going to leave his wife for her but with Marianne and Callista; well I guess each one of them was wanting to be Mrs. Gingrich. In the end the second Mrs. Gingrich is a WOMAN SCORNED.
Hey Ed, when the general election process starts....are you going to hope the we see Barak Obama snorting cocaine lines and smoking grass? Wouldn't that be a great infomercial? What do you think Ed? Better yet, what do you lefties think?
I think it would be outrageous...just like it is outrageous what the left media is trying to do to Gingrich. But know this.....If Newt is the man...Barak had better beware. I was thinking about it last night. Hiring one of the Obama look alikes to snort what appears to be cocaine and smoking a weed like Obama used to do. Wouldn't that be a great ad?
Tell me what you think folks....if the GOP can be attacked like they are for things that happend decades ago....can we bring up Obama's drug use in this campaign.
I would like to hear your thoughts. No name calling....just your thoughts.
I tell you what I think, I think this is a pattern of non stop election cycles. We have ALWAYS had smear campaigns:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffin_Handbills
To me, it is just inevitable (unfortunately) and it seems to work, so it isn't going away. I don't think it is good to focus THIS MUCH on mud slinging and victimhood by media or who asked Marianne to do that interview? We lose sight of issues and we have LOTS of issues. I would like more issue debate, less gay marriage debate. To me other peoples behavior should not be the focus when we have so much to deal with.
The current President was handily elected after his book revealed his past.
To me, the problem is we are in constant campaign mode, so much so that we are also constantly distracted about things that resurface from decades past by radio hosts. I will not list them here because we already have tit for tat enough.
I do not want Newt as president, but for reasons beyond his hypocrisy and focus upon undoing what the ELECTION BY THE PEOPLE has done.
That is my problem with the Republicans, there is an instinct to distract from issues and go down the road of "character" because there issues are not supported, like privatizing Social Security and such things.
I will not be available to respond for some time, as I need to go somewhere now.
ohenry,
the repubs have been smearing President Obama since he took office, on many things, but especially his birth certificate.
i can't believe how ignorant some people are on this subject. capt. america told me to google "barry soetoro" after i asked him for a 'source' for some comments he had made. i am sure you are familiar with all the crap you will find if you google that name.
the repubs are far more skilled at trying to bring down a competitor than democrats will ever be. i am sure you remember what W. bush did to mcCain in south carolina, making robo calls, implying that his adopted daughter was an illegitimate child because of an affair that mcCain had with a black woman.
repubs, under W. bush, framed a popular Alabama gov, Don Siegelman, and sent him to federal prison, because there was no way they could beat him fair and square.
look at the impeachment of Bill Clinton, bringing down a president for things they were doing themselves.
you are writing your post above as if no repub has ever treated Barack Obama horribly. they hounded him about his birth certificate-they said he was muslim, and not a citizen of the united states.
republicans will use any means to bring down a democrat. do some research on what repubs have done to democrats-they sent an innocent man to prison so a republican could become the gov. of the state of alabama.
many people have smoked pot or done cocaine when they were younger. W. bush was one of them, as many other repubs have been.
it has nothing to do with if "you can" bring up Obama's drug use. repubs will do what they think is needed. and the way they have treated President Obama for the past three years, nothing will surprise me.
President Obama will debate any repub with skill and ease. you all want newt because you think he is mean, and can put Obama in his place. even fox and friends knows the reality of a repub debating President Barack Obama. they said, it should never be done, "Barack knows everything".
they are right, for once.
Gingrich had no trouble at all with digging up the Clinton affair to take the whole country down the road of melodrama, Bill with us enduring 24/7 coverage of this. There were awkward conversations with children at dinner tables, I'm sure. This was seemingly the same deal of taking down a president the Republicans don't like. I see a pattern here. The Republicans platform is to stop elected presidents from doing what they were elected to do. So, this exposes the sole goal of Republicans to be making money FROM the taxpayers, while they continually ask for lower taxes for themselves.
It strikes me as selective public support of "politics of personal destruction". I only wish the public would recognize this. Again, IOKIYAR. It's OK if you are Republican.
Not too surprised that S.P. is defending Newt, as she loves to claim victimhood. I see now Newt and all the rest of them do too.
this is newt "push this and wait to see what happens" that was the bomb button u idiot
NEWT GINGRICH, THE EPITOME OF HYPOCRICY. Boy! was he so defensive when he was put in the spotlight (smile) denying the truth of the matter. But its only a matter of time when people will catch on. I wonder what moral value can he add or subtract for his own action. It sure will leave a bad taste in my mouth if I ever hear him say anything about the moral value of the Evangelicals, for as long as I care, they all practice what Newt Gingrich stands for.
Same old @!$%#. Republicans can moved the moral berometer anyplace that suits there needs. YOU TRY IT! Newt is not quilified to be the man. Maybe he could have moved that moral berometer for president Obama when he questioned his BIRTH PLACE AND TIME ETC.!! Again---Republicans NEVER have a real plan---they only have a agenda! Thats what I have on my bumper sticker. I recently e-mail our new republican governor (Lapage of Maine) and asked him about all the credit card swipes that take place every day to feed republicans and all there buddies (every day) while thay gripe about welfare abuse. There form of corporate welfare is o.k. I quess!! Never got an answer!!! HUM!!! Wonder why!! They get to deduct there lunch while we eat lefovers and cannot deduct them. Same old double standard bull!!!