Jennifer Rubin
caught Newt Gingrich in what should be a major transgression in
Sunday’s debate. Here’s the thing: It is flat-out illegal for a
candidate to coordinate in any way with a SuperPac. Yet at Sunday’s
debate, Gingrich showed knowledge of details of a new long-form ad
being produced by a SuperPac supporting him, before the ad aired.
How can that be? If he hasn’t coordinated with them, how does he
know who the sources are for the claims made in the ad?!?
Writes Rubin:
Gingrich said, “When the 27 and a half minute movie comes out, I
hope it’s accurate. I— I— I— I can say, publicly, I hope that
the Super PAC runs an accurate movie about Bain. It’ll be based on
establishment newspapers, like the Washington Post, the Wall Street
Journal, the New York Times, Barron’s, Bloomberg News, and I hope
it is totally accurate. And then people can watch the 27 and a half
minutes of his career at Bain and decide for themselves.”…. You
can judge for yourself whether Gingrich said he hopes the ad would
contain those sources or whether he seemed to know what the
sourcing of the yet-to-be-released ad is. But, I suppose the proof
will be in the pudding. If the super PAC ad does use these
“establishment” newspaper sources to make its case there will be
lots of questions: How did Gingrich know? And when did he know
it?
Remember that Gingrich has gone so far as to call Mitt Romney a
“liar” when Romney denied knowing what the Romney SuperPac was
going to do against Gingrich. Gingrich’s attitude seems to be that
it is beyond belief that a candidate would be unaware, in advance,
of a SuperPac’s plans. Well, this latest exchange seems to fit with
that assumption. The reason he disbelieves Romney, perhaps, is
because he, Gingrich, is in touch with his SuperPac, so he doesn’t
believe that anybody else would follow the law and avoid
coordination with other SuperPacs.
This quite literally calls for a federal investigation. There is
probable cause to believe coordination occurred, based on
Gingrich’s own words. Shouldn’t somebody subpoena his phone
records, or something? Again, if he did coordinate, it would be a
clear and unambiguous violation of federal law. It might be a
stupid law, but it IS law. And there really does seem as if there
is no other explanation for how he knows the sourcing for an ad
whose contents he is not even supposed to know about.
QED, perhaps?