Newt Gingrich Schools FOX Lib Chris Wallace on Clinton Impeachment & Perjury (Video)

If you watch FOX News Sunday you know that Chris Wallace is smart, aggressive, tenacious and very liberal. The FOX News Sunday host is very tough on conservatives. In case you were not convinced of this watch how he pounded Newt Gingrich today during their conversation on the Clinton impeachment.

No, Chris Wallace… The Clinton impeachment was not about having sex in the Oval Office. It was about perjury.

The FOX News host really went too far in grilling Newt Gingrich on his past affairs. Unfortunately for Newt he’s a conservative and liberals like Wallace will bring this up every time he comes on for an interview. He doesn’t get the automatic pass like some liberal would.

Get news like this in your Facebook News Feed,
Gateway Pundit

Facebook Comments

Disqus Comments

  • Rocko

    I disagree. He held a politician accountable. Something I wish the MSM would do. Just because Newt has an (R) behind his name doesn’t mean he doesn’t deserve grilling.

  • IronDioPriest

    Wallace may or may not be a liberal. But there’s no question but that he’s tough on everybody. Nobody gets a pass from him. He’s one of the last TV “journalists” who actually aspires to legitimately fill the role.

    And that PoS Gingrich deserves to be grilled. Grilled right out of the delusion that he is a viable candidate for the GOP nomination. He should go away.

  • Bitter Clinger

    The image of Newt sitting on a couch w/ Pelosi discussing “global warming” is (to quote a famous Democrate candidate) SEARED! SEARED! in my mind. Sorry Newt.

  • whit seven

    I watch Fox news every Sunday and I don’t know Wallace is “very liberal”. He asks everybody hard questions, including our guys. Once again, Jim, all due respect, but I’m just not outraged.

  • CatoRenasci

    Disagree. Newt’s right that the Clinton impeachment was about the rule of law, but it’s perfectly legitimate for Wallace to grill Gingrich about his own behavior.

    Just go away, Newt!

  • wanumba

    Wallace is a coward who got his job thru family connections. He’s liberal Left Democrat and it shows. He practically curled up in a fetal position when Bill Clinton turned red and started jabbing his finger at him on a easier question than what Wallace routinely throws at Republicans who ALWAYS treat him better than that. Bet Republicans don’t call him up afterwards and snarl in his ear about “toeing the line” like his fellow Lefties must do, judging by his whipped puppy demeanor. That’s why he’s a coward. He likes the money, the camera, the insider circle access too much to pursue the truth.

    His questions are ALL carefully within the narrative parameters. He NEVER aks a question that would help viewers be better informed.

  • IronDioPriest

    Idunno what your perspective is “wanumba”. Wallace is not a liberal. He appears as a guest on talk radio shows from time to time, and when he is not wearing his news anchor hat, he espouses opinions that are far more openly conservative.

    As one who is very attentive to media bias, I find the notion of Chris Wallace being liberal and more harsh in his treatment of conservatives to simply be untrue. He is a journalist’s journalist – one of the last few remaining.

    Just because he asks tough questions of conservatives, the answers to which make those conservatives look stupid if they are being disingenuous, does not make him a liberal. He treats liberals just as harshly, and puts them on the spot just as deftly.

  • just a conservative girl

    I hope you are not suggesting he shouldn’t be asked tough questions simply because he is a republican. That is truly sad if you are.

    I didn’t see the show as I am church and I watch the rerun later. But, one thing he should have been asking him about is his flip flop on Libya. He was for it before he was against it. That isn’t leadership it is just Obama bashing. Which is fine if he is pundit, but not too fine if he wants to be the leader of the free world.

    And to say that Clinton’s impeachment wasn’t in part about his affairs is simply ignoring history. It wasn’t what he was charged with, but it was fueled in part by him not keeping his pants on. Wasn’t that what he lied about?

  • RickZ

    The question, Mr. Wallace, is did Gingrich lie in his own divorce depositions? If he did, then he’s a hypocrite. But even if he did lie in his own divorce depositions, he was still doing his proper job as Speaker of the House in bringing impeachment procedings against Blow Job Billy for perjury. Of course, if he were a hypocrite and lied in his own depostions and still brought impechment proceedings, he was opening himself up to perjury charges as well, which could very well have forced his redignation as Speaker and from the House.

    That would be the hypocricy, Mikey boy. The problem with Clinton and Obama is that, while we are a Nation of Laws, those two (as most Dems) do not feel any obligatioin to follow the lawthemselves. Now that’s some stunning hypocricy, Mikey, and maybe you could, you know, look into that.

  • StrangernFiction

    No Chris, hypocrisy would be if Newt had also lied under oath. If Chris Wallace is “smart” he certainly didn’t show it here.

  • Militant Conservative

    Clinton was impeached, only reason he was not removed was a plurality of commie democrats.

    Powder is dry

  • AuntieMadder

    “The FOX News host really went too far in grilling Newt Gingrich on his past affairs. Unfortunately for Newt he’s a conservative and liberals like Wallace will bring this up every time he comes on for an interview. He doesn’t get the automatic pass like some liberal would.”

    Alinsky Rule #4. Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.

    Libturds don’t grill other libturds nor do conservatives grill libturds about affairs past and present because sexual fidelity and monogamy aren’t in the libturd book of rules. (Frankly, I think the pages of the libturd book of rules are blank, like a diary for the libturd to write in his own rules and then even change them later at his/her whim, but I could be wrong.)

    Like Rocko at #1 commented, I’d like to see both libturds and conservatives held to a higher moral standard, even when it comes to their love and sex lives. It’s hard to believe that a man or woman who can’t or won’t remain loyal and keep the vows made to his/her spouse can remain loyal to 300,000 American citizens and keep his/her oath to protect and uphold the Constitution.

  • bg


    i don’t give a bats quano if Newt had sex with this woman, or a monkey for
    that matter, same goes for Clinton.. the fact still remains Clinton lied about
    having sex in “we the people’s Oval Office”.. not at some motel, had he had
    the sense to go to a motel, he could have lied his arse off and i would have
    defended hm as if my life depended on it!!


  • ChillyinAlaska

    Newt, though a smart guy, is unfortunately a RINO, willing to go whatever way the wind blows. He has some good ideas, and some bad ideas, but NO ethics or principles, after all he cheated on his wife.

    Give me the two bimbo’s who have principles and ethics and you know where they stand and know they aren’t going to sell you out.


  • StrangernFiction

    Wallace is not a liberal.

    I’m guessing that you would classify Lindsey Graham as “not a liberal?”

  • Primary Boehner

    I’m going to go out on a limb and guess that all of the Chris Wallace apologists here are also Juan Williams fans.

  • Chisum

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think Gingrich was ever accused of rape.

  • a former democrat

    I know this is a conservative site, but I voted for Clinton, and frankly Newt is being a hypocrite, he was having an affair at the same time trying to impeach clinton for lying about havng an affair. Do I think what clinton did was completely immoral? yes, but it was not criminal, the affair part, Newt is correct in saying it was the lying about the affair.
    and so to me the impeachment was a waste of time in my opinion considering Newt was having an affair at the same time, no one knew until years later of course.

    Its this hypocracy I don’t like. Just like now Newt tries to pretend that he didn’t support Dede Scaozava or sit on a couch with pelosi supporting global warming.

    sorry, I know this is not a popular opinion here, but this is what most independents I know think.

  • a former democrat

    that being said, if its the community agitator vs Newt in 2012, I will vote and support Newt.

  • Rocko

    Primary Boehner – Then I will go out on a limb here too and guess that all Newt supporters are Gary Studds fans.
    Making ad hominem attacks is fun! Thanks for showing me how!