"The one mistake I made was signing a letter written by our lawyers, a firm which frankly did me a great disservice, and that鈥檚 the only thing.鈥� 鈥� Newt Gingrich to CNN, Jan. 22, 2012
The most serious charge examined by the Ethics Committee was an allegation that Gingrich intentionally provided inaccurate and unreliable information in two letters to the panel in an attempt to win a quick dismissal of the ethics case.
When the subcommittee鈥檚 investigation exposed the false statements, Gingrich blamed his lawyer and his staff.
鈥淭he ball appears to have been dropped between my staff and my counsel,鈥� Gingrich told the investigation subcommittee. 鈥淚 erroneously, it turns out, relied on others to verify the accuracy of the statements and responses.鈥�
Once the subcommittee determined the letters were unreliable and inaccurate, the investigation focused on a new question 鈥� whether Gingrich鈥檚 involvement in the submission was intentional or just reckless.
Gingrich鈥檚 lawyer prepared the letters. The lawyer told the committee Gingrich reviewed and approved the content of both letters before they were sent. Gingrich disputed this.
Some committee members were skeptical. 鈥淏oth letters were efforts by Mr. Gingrich to have the committee dismiss the complaints without further inquiry,鈥� the Ethics Committee report says.
It adds: 鈥淥f all the people involved in drafting, reviewing, or submitting the letters, the only person who had first-hand knowledge of the facts contained within them 鈥� was Mr. Gingrich.鈥�
The committee's finding
Ultimately, the committee concluded that Gingrich鈥檚 actions fell somewhere between 鈥渞eckless鈥� and 鈥渋ntentional.鈥�
鈥淣either choice reflects creditably on the House,鈥� the report says.
鈥淭he violation does not represent only a single instance of reckless conduct,鈥� it adds. 鈥淩ather, over a number of years and in a number of situations, Mr. Gingrich showed a disregard and lack of respect for the standards of conduct that applied to his activities.鈥�
In testimony to the subcommittee, Gingrich called the submission of inaccurate information 鈥渁n inadvertent and embarrassing breakdown.鈥� He said: 鈥淎t no time did I intend to mislead the committee or in any way be less than forthright.鈥�
The Ethics Committee ultimately avoided a decision on whether his actions were intentional. Instead, Gingrich and the committee negotiated the equivalent of a plea deal.
The arrangement allowed Gingrich to avoid having to endure a multi-day, nationally-televised trial examining the facts of each of three charges.
Gingrich agreed to a 鈥渞eprimand鈥� and to pay $300,000 if the committee would consolidate the three pending charges into one and remove the word 鈥渒new鈥� from the charge related to the submission of false information. Under the Dec. 21, 1996, agreement, the charge read simply that Gingrich 鈥渟hould have known鈥� his submitted information was inaccurate.
Speaker's reelection
This issue was important to Gingrich鈥檚 political future. In December 1996, he was only weeks away from an anticipated vote on who would serve as speaker in the next Congress. The negotiated deal helped insulate Gingrich from accusations that he intentionally tried to deceive the committee.
Gingrich was reelected speaker on Jan. 7, 1997, receiving 216 votes.
In his Dec. 21, 1996, admission that he violated House rules, Gingrich again placed the blame on his staff and lawyer for the inaccurate and unreliable submissions.
He said he did not manage the submission of information on his behalf intensely enough. 鈥淚n my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable statements were given to the committee,鈥� Gingrich said, 鈥渂ut I did not intend to mislead the committee.鈥�
