Gingrich: ‘File charges’ against Pelosi if she releases dirt on me | The Raw Story

Even if she says nothing Newt is now in an ethical hot seat. We can now all wonder how bad he really was.

I'm sure we only know the tip of his transgressions.

He's already pushing "delusions of grandeur"... If someone spills the beans on something he's done in the past, how is that somehow illegal? Is Newt above the law? I think not.

Ohh, Gingrich, here it's only December of 2011 and already there's that lingering odor of stinky scuttlebutt in the Beltway breeze about your long, looooong history of personal and political transgressions.

In keeping with the late Herman Cain's ice cream nicknames for the campaigns of the various Republican candidates, I would suggest one of the following as the Newt Gingrich Flavor of the Month: Big Newton Clusterf*#k Crunch Royale® or Newt Gangrene Crème de Menthe Pistachio®.

If she has the goods, she'll wait until October to release them. She's savvy.

file charges on what crime? exposing a fatheaded criminal fool?

David Boddie, are any of them above the law? My experience tells me that yes they are.

An oath of office means nothing. A signed document avowing to be ethical in the execution of their office means nothing.

Get this, I was one of those chumps that actually thought ethics, integrity, and character meant something, lol, boy was I wrong.

Well, Newt, hate to be the one to tell you, but "God forgave me for that, too" won't fly with the courts.

Precisely.

Everyone already knows he's a scumbag in his personal life. (Apparently, the party of Christian family values isn't bothered by that)

Fortunately for Newty, being a douchebag cheater and all-around POS isn't illegal.

It's that other stuff that got him in trouble in congress that he wants to keep hidden...

Newt doesn't want to become the president he can't afford the pay cut.

He really isn't running for president he too is on a book tour with a debate thrown in now and then just to keep his name in the news.

It would not be up to Newt to file charges it would be up to the House Leadership.

So Newt says he was exonerated on all accounts? How does the square with his having to pay a $300,000 fine and being removed from his post as speaker of the house? Newt is such a bloviator. The outcome of an ethics investigation of a publicly elected official should be public information. Why is Newt so adamant that it not be released?

Why is Newt so adamant that it not be released?

My guess is they uncovered something that could be considered criminal and gave him a pass for one reason or another.

Well, I wonder what "dirt" she has. If I were him, I would rethink this. I don't think she is the kind of "women" to be messing with.

He sorta let the cat out of the bag didn't he.

Boy!!

Nancy sure made the NewtBomb stain his shorts with a quickness, eh?

Wonder what's in those transcripts...

Must be pretty bad if he's willing to by-pass the usual... "there's absoluetly nothing there! Heh heh heh! I swear.." and move straight to "Oh puhleeeze puhleeeze protect me Oh Great Law! Mine a$$ is grass if'n you don't!!", whimpering and whinging.

I'm pretty sure only prosecutors can 'file charges' against someone. Looks like Goofy McDip@!$%# needs to take a civics class.

My guess is Nancy will not run this time (age) so the more she talks about what the Ethics Committee has on Gringrich, the more he needs to stay nimble, and the more nimble he is the deeper the hole he will dig.

...and she won't have to disclose anything - except why is she grinning!

Hey Nancy.

All you have to do is to invite someone from the press in your office to talk about your inside a traders act investments, and leave a folder on your desk labled " The Dirt On Newt", you don't have to say a thing, Just leave the room for a few minutes and the folder can go missing no harm no foul. Then we will all know what you want us to know about him (even though he as only a slim chance in Hattie's of winning a nomination) and you can say without lying. I never said a word to anyone!

Are these files on Newt sealed? I am sure if someone filed an FOI, it could all come out. He was a public figure, so isn't all that Congressional info on him open to the public if anyone wants t osee it?

I don't know, so I am asking? Anyone know the legal-ese on this?

you just know an aide or previous disgruntled employee is ready to serve up this info incognito if newt gets the republican leadership..probably just waiting for the primo moment to leak it..for him to say this is a violation means there is other evidence than that 1 incident he is talking about..but it will probably be one of his own disgruntled ex employees that worked on this that will send it in...after he possibly wins the primary for the most embarrasing effect

Nancy sure made the NewtBomb stain his shorts with a quickness, eh?

Good one :-) That's what I thought when I saw the clip earlier today. All the color was gone from his face and he looked like someone had stepped on his grave.

now the Newtster, that is not like a Gerbil or Hamster that SaintOrum can abuse is it?

“If she’s suggesting that she’s going to use materials that she developed when she was on the ethics committee, that is a fundamental violation of the rules of the House, and I would hope that members would immediately file charges against her the second she does it,”

After that comment does Pelosi really need to release any information on Gingrich?

I just read the 'transcripts'...or at least parts of them....they are public and have been all along...they describe how Newt used Tax Payer Money for partisan purposes and also funneled money from a tax exempt entity for partisan purposes then when asked by a Congressional Committee for responses to allegations of impropriety, lied to them....so...there's that...

Sorry, but.... my first smart alleck thought is that he cheated on his third wife with Nancy.

C'mon Republicans, tell me that you would trust your teenage daugter, or for that matter your teenage son or dog in an empty room with Naughty Newt.

There SHOULDN'T BE ANYTHING to reveal or divulge in the first place. But hey, the GOP already proved that they really don't care about honesty, character, ethics, morals, and family values, when it applies to a fellow Republican.

He's just worried about what she is going to reveal about what really happened on that couch when no one was looking. (lol)

It might get him in trouble with his current wife ...

Sorry, but.... my first smart alleck thought is that he cheated on his third wife with Nancy.

Dude, I thought the exact same thing.

A hypocrite is the best the GOP will be able to offer this election cycle. MItt in 2012!

dayum, let the cat fight begin.

Personally, I don't like either one of these government thief's. Just toss them both into a volcano and see if it pleases the Obama God.

Are these files on Newt sealed?

I read the Times account of the subcommittee deliberations and recommendations. What strikes me as pathetic is how the accused can negotiate how the final report is written. It is like a "Law & Order" episode where Newt is agreeing to a plea bargain, rather than having a full disciplinary hearing:

Beginning on Dec. 15, 1996, Mr. Gingrich's counsel and the special counsel began discussions directed toward resolving the matter without a disciplinary hearing. The discussions lasted through Dec. 20, 1996. At that time an understanding was reached by both Mr. Gingrich and the subcommittee concerning this matter. That understanding was put on the record on Dec. 21, 1996 by Mr. Cole follows:

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/01/18/us/text-of-analysis-and-conclusion-from-report-by-house-ethics-counsel.html?ref=jamesmcole&pagewanted=5

This self policing of congress is no more effective or ethical than wall street self policing itself (we all saw what that got us). Any ethics questions should be investigated by a non-partisan independent counsel.

He was a public figure, so isn't all that Congressional info on him open to the public if anyone wants to see it?

Seems congress lives by a different set of rules than the rest of us. Who knows what's been buried or shredded.

as a public servant, shouldn't all ethics violations and crimes committed in his official capacity be made public?

Thanks, Newt. Now Pelosi doesn't have to do anything since you've confirmed for everyone that she does have dirt on you. Who will vote for you now unless you come clean and explain yourself?

Haha, Newt is so dirty and corrupt that he can't even attack Pelosi who is one of the most corrupt democrats there is.

He could have attacked Pelosi on her insider trading and betting against legislation but because Newt does the same thing he can't.

Both of them should be arrested and their property and all wealth seized.

If I was Pelosi, I would wait to release "any" dirt until AFTER ole Newty gets the GOP nomination...heh heh heh!!!

Trust me Pelosi knows her timing.

Newt has so many skeletons in his closet,that Mrs. Pelosi doesn't have to have anything to get this fool to think that she has.But if she does,I really hope she calls his bluff.

I'm sure he has plenty of lawyers as does she. Either way I am sure there is @!$%# she don't want talked about and we already know most of Newts. If she makes an unfounded accusation that ends up being proven false then that would be a pretty big win for Newt and would be an end to Nancy (then again it is San Francisco). I don't see any difference between Bachmann and Pelosi. You can take that any way you like.

Fla Pat, excellent post. Since we all know that Congress goes easy on their members who commit crimes and theft of the people they represent everyday, the fact that he got fined $300.000. and was ran out of the House, the dung must be pretty deep. Usually just a little slap on the wrist is all they get, so Newt's crimes must be doozy's.

He's just worried about what she is going to reveal about what really happened on that couch when no one was looking.

Oh man...Bad visual. Lost my appetite.

Only thing is, she shouldn't have announced it. She shouldn't have said a word---she should have waited to see if he actually gets the nomination, waited about a week and then utilized that tried-and-true political trick called the "unidentified inside source leak."

Funny how Newt's sweating over this. Michelle @ post 1.38 is sopt-on; IMO when Newt was run out of the House, his fellow thieves also protected him from being put totally "on blast," and I believe the old boy otherwise would have been in some reeeeeally deep doo-doo.

It should be noted that Nancy Pelosi isn't exactly the epitome of political virtue, so what happened that, after all these years, she's willing to turn on him---and risk his wrath on the completely off-chance that Newt could beat Obama in an election? Stranger things have happened...

Ron W., you may be onto something here. Hell hath no fury, and all that.

I wonder if jane's hubby should worry about the paternity of their kids? Jane Fortson Eisenach.

Newt trying to hide his slime trail.

Nancy's brilliance outshines him by far. Is she going to release the public information? "Not right here. When the time's right." Smile that sweet Cheshire grin, Nancy!

Wait until he's nominated to release the info. It'll put nails in the Republican coffin.

Wait until he's nominated to release the info. It'll put nails in the Republican coffin.

One thing still bothers me ... why did she even mention this before the general election?

file charges on what crime

Obstruction of Newtness.

Roy, she said what she said to get a public reaction. She doesn't even have to release anything now. He gave her the reaction she was looking for (i.e. the admission of some form of guilt) and the press will do the rest. I'm sure the FOIA requests have been filed already. My guess is there is something borderline criminal that the HEC gave him a pass on because they couldn't quite prove guilt. We may see something that can put ole' Newter in prison. (crossing fingers in anticipation!!!)

north,

the only thing that the HEC can do is expel a member from the government body, so the moment he said he would resign/not run, then there would be no more sanction that can be applied. If there is a risk that there may not be a 'conviction' and subsequent expelling, then there is no point to proceeding since you already get the maximum punishment.

Now considering that Rangel didn't get expelled, there must have been something really nasty in the gingrich file.

WoodieRae-3499404... I agree and THAT is why conservatives hate her, because she "plays the game? better than they can. But seriously, Newt is just the lesser of the other dummies they have to choose from because they do not "like" Romney. Now Newt is kissing up to Trump!... we'll see how long he's the darling.

Jonathan-

If they uncover something criminal, they are compelled to turn it over to the DOJ, right?

north,

I would hope so, but Senator Coburn didn't have his criminal activities (covering up the John Ensign activities) released to the DOJ, so it appears that there are limits to that disclosure.

Newt Gingrich; putting the p in pffttt...

THESE ARE PUBLIC RECORDS NEWT

What charges would you bring her up on? Vandalizing The Newt Edifice?

They were violations of Codes of Ethics set by the Congress. It is every citizen's right (and duty) to read the report of Newt's misdeeds. This is the people's business.

It seems yet another Republican doesn't understand that this is all available to anyone with a connection to the "series of tubes" we in the reality based world call the internet.

IN THE MATTER OF REPRESENTATIVE NEWT GINGRICH

Even through he hasn't won anything yet, Newt's voracious ego can't be contained in it's pudgy vessel.

This is a very reveling look into Newt's soul. This is who he is.

By merely suggesting she'll retain the information for a later date, she's making him squirm. "Me thinks thou doth protest too much" usually precludes assumed guilt. She might never even have to say a word. Newt kissing up to Trump won't endear him much in most Republicans' eyes. Even to Republicans, Trump is self-absorbed.

I know. It doesn't say much.

I thought the article and thread were about Gingirich and Pelosi. #63.54 reported as no value.

Deb, please tell me that rant was sarcasm.

Deb?

Where were you when Bush was breaking down our government's checks and balances with signing statements indicating how he wasn't going to enforce the laws that he signed?

Where were you when the majority republicon congress rubber stamped everything that Bush wanted without any filibusters or other obstructionism?

President Obama has not and can not overtake the government as much as you would like to believe. You know that conservative democrats have been lock step voting with conservative republicons since Obama has been president but you really must overlook that fact because it does not fit the narrative of your rant. Your rant reminds me of Fox Spews content that blasts President Obama just because he exists. Fox gave credit to Bush when Obama killed bin Laden and Bush was very happy to claim the credit. Where were you when that happened?

DNFTT.

Deb - ignored

Newt's gonna be ok. Nancy will quiet down as soon as his supporters dump him for Santorum, the next ice cream flavor of the month. Nutty Santorum splooge chunk?

Ew.

He was a public figure, so isn't all that Congressional info on him open to the public if anyone wants to see it?

Since the HEC action does not result in an adversarial hearing, there is no need to disclose "background" information. Also, the rules of evidence in the HEC would probably allow innuendo, heresay and just plain ole gossip. So a lot of what is not disclosed probably has little value by itself.

I'm guesing there is something there, Michael, based on Newter's response.

If she does have decent dirt, I hope she waits until he's the nominee...Mitt, Newt, who cares, doesn't matter...they are both too lame to sit in the oval and most know this.

Awesome news, if Nancy presents the information for us! Bye bye Newt! lol

The Republican BULLY....I hope he DOES file charges against Pelosi...and I fervantly hope he becomes the Republican Presidential nominee.

It will make Deb's head spin (1.54) and guarantee President Obama's 2nd term...and possibly bring Ging-grinch up before an ethics commission.

BULLY.

That was the first thing I thought when I read this. Newt needs to remember that to appear Presidential, you can't come off as a ninny throwing a hissy fit.

“I know a lot about him. I served on the investigative committee that investigated him, four of us locked in a room in an undisclosed location for a year. A thousand pages of his stuff.”

Why is he even running? They have it all on paper.

Jimster

Great link in post 1.52

The investigation of this matter began on January 3, 1996, and lasted through December 12, 1996. In the course of the investigation, approximately 90 subpoenas or requests for documents were issued, approximately 150,000 pages of documents were reviewed, and approximately 70 people were interviewed. Most of the interviews were conducted by Mr. Cole outside the presence of the Subcommittee. A court reporter transcribed the interviews and the transcripts were made available to the Members of the Subcommittee. Some of the interviews were conducted before the Members of the Subcommittee primarily to explore the issue of whether Mr. Gingrich had provided the Committee, directly or through counsel, inaccurate, unreliable, or incomplete information

I want the information, can we request it through the Freedom Of Information Act?

MJL,

Most likely not, it would be similar to the legality of Grand Jury evidence being released.

Jonathan

Oh, darn it. I want to see what is in the information .

T-800 they would be sealed, hell of the specifics of Tom Coburn's actions in the coverup and misuse of election funds in the John Ensign scandal are locked up, then there is little chance of the minor transgressions of Newt will be released.

But I wanna see it now :) :)

This is gonna get good. I said the Dems had something up their sleaves and it was gonna get lively.

Ol' Newt is gonna crap his pants. :) :)

Newt claimed he isn't hiding anything, yet his anxiety attack indicates fear. Bachmental might just be the last man standing.

Deb, please tell me that rant was sarcasm.

None of it was sarcasm and every single word was true. The secret service say that Michelle Obama hates whites so much she makes a point of saying it almost every day. Obama has said he hates the idea of our flag and hates America and wants to bring it down so that other countries won't hate us (translate that to be jealous of us). No, unfortunately it is not sarcasm, I wish it was.

Where were you when Bush was breaking down our government's checks and balances with signing statements indicating how he wasn't going to enforce the laws that he signed?

Screaming just as loud my dear, screaming just as loud. Why do you people always assume because we don't like Obama that we must have liked Bush? How about BOTH suck equally? Geez, he's running this country into the ground! So did Bush! No budget, no energy policy that makes sense, no leadership, c'mon people! Stop fighting with each other and really open your eyes. Are we going to keep up this stupid back and forth fighting just so we can have another fool in the WH who will only make themselves rich and live high on the hog on OUR DIME then move on, the hell with all of us? Oh, so you can say the day after election day, "woohoo, my guy won" neener, neener, neener. And then we can proceed to fall further down the toilet until our enemies just pick the carcass that used to be America. Isn't it sooooooo nice your guy won? Do you feel good now? Do you have a job now? Are you still paying too much for gas? Are they teaching your kids how to read and add or how to put a condom on a banana and that it's ok for Johnny to have two daddies? Do you like the government telling you what you can eat, when you can drive your car, what car you can drive, if you are cost effective to have a needed operation, when and where you are allowed to pray, how to raise your children, or better yet just taking them from you and raising them in some government camp so they turn out thinking "correctly"?

And no I'm not a Ronulan (Ron Paul fan) either. I'm a realist and think for myself and I can honestly recognize a lying ass hole when I see one and it makes no difference what stupid letter they have after their name. It is residing in the WH right now. And 4 years ago a different lying ass hole was residing there. When is this going to stop?! When that Clue Train rolls on by, quite a few of you ought to hop on for a ride.

Gee, I knew there was a reason that I Deb-658853 Ignoring author. Thank you for reminding me.

T-800,

there is no way that the secret service is saying that. That would be a violation of their most fundamental oath. There are very FEW instances where any Secret Service agent can be compelled to disclose anything that they may have heard in the execution of their duties, and to do so willingly would be a serious violation of their legal obligations

Hang in there T-800, she will bring it soon......

<<<<crickets>>>>

And pelosi doesn't have to violate any laws, all she has to do is bring into focus what was happening when newt was in the house. Nothing special, and newts threats of retaliation are nothing more than that.

Deb

I'll take ANYONE to get them out of there.

I wouldn't go that far but I gave you a vote. One of 3 so you can see how ridiculously liberal this site is. No brains.

The Secret Service....says?....come ON Dub.

What part of secret don't you understand?

When that Clue Train rolls on by, quite a few of you ought to hop on for a ride.

Yup, insulting people is the best way to change their point of view.

Deb, I can without reservation say you are full of shyte.

The secret service say that Michelle Obama hates whites

Two facts that I know: 1. The SS agents on the Presidential detail are required to sign secrecy agreements and any breach of those agreements can cost them their jobs and land them in jail. This is the reason no one from the SS would go on record regarding the Bush twins underage drinking and drug use. 2. Having worked the Obama election campaign I did have the honor of meeting the First Lady for about 2 minutes. Our group of volunteers was all white and she had absolutely zero animosity (even hugged a couple of the vols) and zero guile in her.

In other words - you are lying. Whether you are a habitual liar, I'll leave that to the people who know you, it's not for me to say. But this is yet another piece of evidence pointing in that direction.

Hey, Deb.........I just have one thing to say to you......OBAMA 2012! OBAMA 2012! OBAMA 2012!!

And Obama 2012!

I would also like to add, "Obama 2012!"

I love it!

Don't mind the trolls...

Making up hysterical lies is all they can do anymore.

@WeBDoomed

I wouldn't go that far but I gave you a vote. One of 3 so you can see how ridiculously liberal this site is. No brains

I am fully aware of that. :D I used to post a lot, but it's a ridiculous waste of time, really. I won't convince a single person here to change their liberal stance regardless of what I say or prove or don't prove. So I usually don't even bother proving anything, it's a waste of time. It's just sort of fun to watch them all go bat @!$%# now and then. :D The TRUTH drives them absolutely batty! It's so far removed from their manufactured reality they blow a fuse, call me all sorts of nasty things, LOL, I suppose it's supposed to hurt my feelings. LOL. The worse the insult the more I know I've hit a nerve. :D

You know what's comforting WeBDoomed? That the people on NV only represent a very small percentage of the population that votes. :D BTW, I was exaggerating to make a point, I wouldn't take just anyone, but the only way the country could survive 4 more years of Obama is if we take all of the House and Senate and make him impotent. The local races are just as important this time around. Thanks for the vote. :D

The secret service say that Michelle Obama hates whites so much she makes a point of saying it almost every day. Obama has said he hates the idea of our flag and hates America and wants to bring it down so that other countries won't hate us (translate that to be jealous of us). No, unfortunately it is not sarcasm, I wish it was.

I can't begin to tell you how misguided this is. But, to be fair, I'll give you an opportunity to provide some back-up. So, with that said, please provide something to verify your assertion that the above statements are fact.

It's so far removed from their manufactured reality they blow a fuse, call me all sorts of nasty things, LOL, I suppose it's supposed to hurt my feelings. LOL. The worse the insult the more I know I've hit a nerve.

So, you admit that you post fallacious and inflammatory statements in order to hit a nerve? To what end? Are you attempting to get "liberal" viners suspended or banned?

It's so far removed from their manufactured reality they blow a fuse, call me all sorts of nasty things, LOL, I suppose it's supposed to hurt my feelings. LOL. The worse the insult the more I know I've hit a nerve.

So, you admit that you post fallacious and inflammatory statements in order to hit a nerve? To what end? Are you attempting to get "liberal" viners suspended or banned?

When you take it out of context it sounds completely different than when you put the ENTIRE sentence together. Geez what a blantant, but weak attempt to twist my words. LOL! Here is the ENTIRE sentence, which doe begin with the fact that I post the TRUTH. And no I don't have your malicious nature, so I'm not looking to get anyone banned. It wouldn't even occur to me to try. I merely think you're all sadly funny and sort of hopeless. I would say it might be a bit mean spirited to clown on you a little, but hey, I'm human I should be able to give at least as good as I'm getting. Funny how you chose to leave out those first few words of my sentence.

The TRUTH drives them absolutely batty! It's so far removed from their manufactured reality they blow a fuse, call me all sorts of nasty things, LOL, I suppose it's supposed to hurt my feelings. LOL. The worse the insult the more I know I've hit a nerve. :D

Who's truth? Many have asked for proof of your assertions. There has been no response. I respectfully request that you provide proof of your assertions as requested in post #1.92. I know you cannot because the statement is false and intended to do just as your post said. Hit a nerve.

Funny how you chose to leave out those first few words of my sentence.

Yeah, and it's funny that you were asked to back up your assertions, and not only have you not done so, but attempted to deflect from the actual question, Deb-658853...

The secret service say that Michelle Obama hates whites so much she makes a point of saying it almost every day

Deb-658853 maybe you were refering to this video which is countered by this story. Understand that in the video the guy (Wild Bill) has his own website which to no one suprise is a TP member.

No Secret Service agent would ever speak of a current protectee in the manner Wild Bill suggests....this is clearly Right Wing political rhetoric bull@!$%# not to mention agenda motivated.

http://shutking.blogspot.com/2011/08/secret-service-secrets-insight-into.html

DS12,

and considering that 'wild bill' has absolutely NOTHING to back up his claims, and makes assertions that are just patently idiotic, (like Bush II is the most intelligent and astute president we have ever had), it just makes the whole thing a total @!$%#wad.

a total @!$%#wad

Indeed...and one endearing term there ;)

Who's truth? Many have asked for proof of your assertions. There has been no response. I respectfully request that you provide proof of your assertions as requested in post #1.92. I know you cannot because the statement is false and intended to do just as your post said. Hit a nerve.

What would be the point? None of you really want to know the truth and no matter what I posted you wouldn't believe it, so why bother? I've posted things directly from a statistical, non-partisan sight, only to have NV posters say it can't be true. Give me a break. If it makes you feel good to say it's not true because lil ol me won't post a link, then so be it. If you REALLY wanted to know the truth, you'd look it up yourself. But you don't, so you won't.

I don't play the "post a link" game. Those that want to know, will look it up. Those that don't, it wouldn't matter what I posted, so it would be a waste of my time to do so. I speak what I know to be true. You need more, look it up. That's what my Dad used to tell me.

deb,

the truth is that if someone actually made those comments to 'wild bill' then he/she would be in violation of a whole series of laws. Remember during the Clinton administration there was talk of compelling a secret service agent to testify, and that got nixed. Do you know why that got nixed? because there is NOTHING that can actually compel a secret service agent to testify. Under law they cannot be compelled to say anything. But not only can they not be compelled to say anything, they are NOT ALLOWED to say anything. That is considered the same as TREASON.

So the reality is that what 'wild bill' stated in his video is 10,000% bull@!$%#, because it would be a GROSS VIOLATION OF THE LAW for anyone to actually make those comments to him. They are SWORN to secrecy as part of their job (though not all secret service agents are sworn to that level of secrecy, the presidential detail is).

FYI, Deb. The "post a link" game you are referring to is called supporting a statement with evidence. When someone makes wild accusations and statements claiming they are factual they need to support their position when called on it. We all do it. When someone posts wild accusations they cannot back up, they are either trolling or very misinformed. If you don't want people to ask you to back up your position then don't post.

The "post a link" game you are referring to is called supporting a statement with evidence

Exactly...you post the most pertinent part of the point you want to prove and provide a link backing it up...if there is a debate....so be it...then substantive comments can be made by looking up links for the opposite side. People are entitled to their own opinions...NOT their own facts.