Divorce Documents Contradict Newt's Account

Rate this post

Many Catholics are impressed by Newt Gingrich’s late-life conversion to the Roman Catholic Church and his candid admission of past mistakes, including his pattern of marital infidelities.
Newt had cheated on his first wife — Jackie, his former high school geometry teacher — with the woman (Marianne) who became his second wife. Then, for six years, he cheated on his second wife Marianne with the woman, Callista, who became his third and current wife.

Newt with Wife #1, Jackie, and their 2 daughters

Regarding Gingrich’s two divorces, his campaign website states:

“Newt has been honest and forthright about the fact that he has had moments in his life that he regrets, that he has had to seek reconciliation, and go to God for forgiveness. Newt believes that by continuing to be honest and forthright about his past failings, voters will come to understand the man that he is now and conclude they can trust him to represent the American people in the White House. Furthermore, Newt welcomes the opportunity to clear up the many lies and misconceptions that persist about his past.”

But divorce documents that recently came to light contradict his present account that it was his wife (no. 1) who requested the divorce.
Napp Nazworth reports for Christian Post, Dec. 27, 2011:

“Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has maintained that his divorce from his first wife, Jackie Battley Gingrich, was amicable and requested by his wife. Divorce papers recently uncovered by CNN suggest that is not true.

Gingrich’s daughter, Jackie Gingrich Cushman [who is working for Newt’s campaign], wrote a May 8, 2011 article for Townhall.com in which she defended her father against accusations that he divorced Jackie Battley Gingrich because she had cancer and delivered the divorce papers while she was lying in a hospital bed.

Jackie Gingrich Cushman was 13 at the time and present at the hospital visit. In her article, she says that her parents did not divorce because her mom had cancer. Her parents had already agreed to the divorce. Her mom was recovering in the hospital from the removal of a benign tumor. Newt Gingrich went to visit her in the hospital and the visit happened to coincide with when he had the divorce papers.

[…] While most of Jackie Gingrich Cushman’s defense of her father is not in doubt, there is one detail that the new documents appear to contradict – that her mother requested the divorce.

‘My mother and father were already in the process of getting a divorce, which she requested,’ she wrote.

Newt.org repeats this claim. ‘It was her mother that requested the divorce, not Newt, and it was months before the hospital visit in question.’

Court documents reveal, however, Newt Gingrich filed for divorce from Jackie Battley Gingrich. In a counterclaim, Jackie Battley Gingrich denied that the marriage was irretrievably broken and that she wanted a divorce. ‘Defendant shows that she has adequate and ample grounds for divorce, but that she does not desire one at this time,’ the counterclaim states.

Additional court documents show that the former wife took Newt Gingrich back to court after the divorce because he was not making alimony payments.

In an interview with CNN, Leonard H. ‘Kip’ Carter, a former close friend of Newt Gingrich, confirmed that Newt Gingrich asked for the divorce. He also told CNN that Jackie Battley Gingrich and her two daughters were living without food or utilities because of the lack of alimony payments. He recalled that their Baptist church held a food drive to help care for the family. When the pastor asked Newt Gingrich to give to the fund, he donated $100.

Newt Gingrich reportedly told Carter why he wanted a divorce. ‘You know and I know that she’s not young enough or pretty enough to be the wife of a president.’

Carter broke off his friendship with Newt Gingrich as a result of the way he treated his first wife.

Newt Gingrich was already dating Marianne Ginther, who would become his second wife, at the time the divorce proceedings were taking place. In the mid-1990s, Newt Gingrich had an affair with Callista Biseck, who would become his third wife shortly after divorcing Marianne Ginther Gingrich in 2000.

When asked about the court documents, a Gingrich campaign spokesman said that while Newt Gingrich did file the divorce papers, he did so at Jackie Battley Gingrich’s request.”

Newt with Wife #2, Marianne

Newt with Wife #3, Callista. Pretty enough to be First Lady!

At the risk of, once again, incurring the ire of Newt fans, my message to you is:

Caveat emptor!


Please follow and like us:

26 responses to “Divorce Documents Contradict Newt's Account

  1. Newt, can’t trust him…

    • There’s an Esquire article from 2007 that includes extensive quotes from his 2nd wife, Marianne. They were married for 18 years. He was carrying on his affair with Callista during the last 6 years of that marriage. Here are some of her quotes:
      “He believes that what he says in public and how he lives don’t have to be connected,” she says. “If you believe that, then yeah, you can run for president.”
      Sitting on a bench, she squints against the light. “He always told me that he’s always going to pull the rabbit out of the hat,” she says. (pg 1 of 8)
      … There was something missing inside, so he had to think his way into doing the right thing. “Newt trained himself. He wasn’t a natural. He doesn’t have natural instincts and insights. Everything has to be a thought process first. It took years and years. It wasn’t, ‘I have this insight, I am compelled, I can do no other.’ It was step by step by step by step, and it was all mental, all learned behavior.” (pg 4 of 8)
      Read more: https://www.esquire.com/features/newt-gingrich-0910#ixzz1hrTc2Uqj

  2. Thank you for a well presented eye opener Dr. Eowyn! Newt’s past behaviors are awful. At 68, perhaps he HAS made a turn around. For the sake of his soul, I hope he has. My support for him has only been because I believe that Newt is the only one that can honestly bring down Obama in a debate and hold fast to it. My first and honest choice for the Presidency is Sarah Palin. I hope she throws her hat in the ring!!!!

  3. This guy carries more baggage than Delta.
    And should he get the nod for the nomination, the MSM is going to hang him with it, too.

    • I saw where the political cartoonists are all rooting for him, for obvious reasons. He’d be great fodder for them!

  4. Perry 2012…

  5. I recommend you go to https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2825177/posts?page=1
    and read the many comments that address Newt’s “he said/she said” 30yr old divorce.

    • and the purpose of spending our time doing that is… ?

      • There is no purpose as you already have him hung drawn and quartered. However the following comments reveal there are a large number of true Patriots out there who believe that Newt is a strong savvy conservative leader (not a Saint) capable of destroying the Marxist Muslim and delivering back the Republic to the people. Here are a few of them >
        “His wife could have asked for it…..and he filed……………..So what?”
        “Who gives a damn? We need a candidate that is not a spouting, pandering liberal and who will FIGHT OBAMA toe-to-toe and then LEAD this country back to being America again and run by and for the people?”
        “Wow, how absolutely critical to our nation—Newt’s divorce 30 years ago. It’s so nice that they gave militant, radical Obama a proctology exam in 2008 about his background.”
        God Bless

        • “There is no purpose as you already have him hung drawn and quartered.”
          Wow, I hadn’t known that to provide information is “hanging, drawing, and quartering”! Frankly, your hyperbolic use of “hung, drawn and quartered” is a terrible insult to those who, like Scot patriot William Wallace, were thus executed.
          Since you say “there is no purpose,” then why did you recommend the site to us in the first place?
          Why do you believe Newt to be the only candidate who can defeat Obama? The latest Rasmussen poll, Dec. 27, finds Gingrich trailing Obama by 10 points in a hypothetical 2012 matchup: 37% vs. 47%.

  6. It is also probably true that “caveat emptor” was the motis operandi with the early Christians when St. Paul was trying to obtain confidence from them, inasmuch as he spearheaded the martyrdom of St. Stephen as a former Jewish high official, but also spearheaded the killing of other Christians. I realize, of course, that St. Paul is such an exceptional individual and saint that someone could say that the comparison in this case is hardly applicable. Nevertheless, the principle is the same.
    I do not see how Newt has contradicted himself when he states that Jackie requested the divorce, and he filed for it. Having worked in law offices for many years, I know that It is not uncommon for a party to file as a plaintiff in a divorce action at the request of the other spouse. He has apparently stated that she asked for the divorce and he filed it at her request.
    At this juncture, the term, “caveat emptor” can be applicable to all of the candidates. I am not a “fan” of Newt, but I am listening, watching and thinking, as I am doing with all of the candidates.

    • Wow, you’re comparing Newt to St. Paul! I am stunned.
      St. Paul proved his conversion was genuine with actions, not just words, including the ultimate demonstration of his conversion — his martyrdom for Christ. Please point us to those actions, not words, of Newt’s on which those of us who are skeptics can hang our confidence that he is truly a changed man.

      • Dr. Eowyn, this is really weird. I prepared a reply to your reply fairly quickly, and it appeared on the screen. When I came back to look at the post again, it disappeared. I don’t know what happened. Oh well, I’ll set it forth again. Computers! I wanted to be timely in our discussion.
        Wow, Dr. Eowyn, I already set forth that disparity by stating, “that someone could say the comparison in this case is hardly applicable.” I took the “wind from the sails” of an impending criticism by recognizing the disparity myself. However, I did also state, “Nevertheless, the principle is the same.” St. Paul, after he BEGAN his conversion to Christ and desired to obtain the friendship and bonds of other Christians, he had an extremely difficult time of obtaining their trust, understandably, because of his past sins, his actions of violence. I merely pointed out that Newt Gingrich is also having problems gaining trust from people because of his past, and he himself recognized this and did not deminimize the effects of his sins. However, I believe in giving people a chance to change, as I have witnessed conversion and experienced my own conversion. How has Newt not demonstrated his conversion? At least he is trying to fight for our country against Obama. This is a significant action of conversion, and becoming Catholic, participating in the Sacraments, including the Sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist, are also actions of conversion.
        As to the point of this post, I still do not see how Gingrich contradicted himself by saying that his first wife requested the divorce. As I previously stated, it is not uncommon for a spouse to request the other spouse to obtain the divorce, making such a request verbaly, and the other spouse filing as the Plaintiff in a divorce action. How has Gingrich contradicted himself in this regard?
        As to Newt Gingrich not being a martyr, this is hardly applicable since Newt Gingrich is alive and trying to fight for this country, as are all of the other candidates. I will state again that I am not a “FAN” of Newt Gingrich, but I see goodness in him and certain talents.

        • From my post:
          “In a counterclaim, Jackie Battley Gingrich denied that the marriage was irretrievably broken and that she wanted a divorce. ‘Defendant shows that she has adequate and ample grounds for divorce, but that she does not desire one at this time,’ the counterclaim states.”
          “In an interview with CNN, Leonard H. ‘Kip’ Carter, a former close friend of Newt Gingrich, confirmed that Newt Gingrich asked for the divorce.

          But you choose to dismiss these two individuals to believe what a Gingrich campaign spokesman said — that while Newt Gingrich did file the divorce papers, he did so at Jackie Battley Gingrich’s request.

          • It is because I have lived in the legal world for over thirty years. “Amazing.” Dr. Eowyn, why did you make the comment, “Amazing?” Again, it is not uncommon for legal documents to reflect different actualities than verbal discussions between parties. First of all, a Gingrich campaign spokesman must be very careful to provide accurate statements. A percipient witness to the Gingrichs’ discussions of divorce was their daughter, Jackie Gingrich Cushman. In a post called, “Setting the Record Straight,” in a site called, “creators.com”, Jackie Cushman states in pertinent part as follows, “. . .As for my parents’ divorce, I can remember when they told me. It was the spring of 1980. . .My parents told my sister and me that they were getting a divorce as our family of four sat around the kitchen table of our ranch home. . .My mother and father were already in the process of getting a divorce, which she requested.”
            As to the legal documents of record, the Complaint for Divorce was filed on July 14, 1980. On July 28, 1980, Ms. Gingrich signed an Acknowledgement of Service, confirming that she had been given a copy of the divorce complaint, thus obviating the need for her to be served by a deputy sheriff. This also shows knowledge of the upcoming filing, so that she would not have to be personally served. On September 12, 1980, Mrs. Gingrich filed an Answer and Counterclaim. Even though she requested the divorce, and the children were informed that the divorce was going to happen, a party in any kind of litigation must file the Answer and Counterclaim in order to protect their rights, especially covering and guarding financial rights, so that a Default might not ensue, and she then filed Motions for financial support. But apparently the parties came to a quick agreement, which was filed on January 31, 1981, and the actual Judgment and Decree was filed on February 2, 1981, with the parties’ Agreement being incorporated into the Decree. Usually, an Agreement will go back and forth between attorneys before it is finally signed and then ultimately filed. Therefore, if Ms. Gingrich really did not want the divorce, she wouldn’t have told her children they were getting divorced, and she wouldn’t have signed an Agreement so quickly after the Complaint was filed.
            Therefore, given the representations of a percipient witness, the Gingrichs’ daughter, and given the representations of a Gingrich campaign spokesperson who must be very careful what is said for obvious reasons, I do not see how Newt Gingrich contradicted himself.

        • Well said.

  7. People, People, People anybody that really knows Newt knows that he is a LIAR and a Scum Bag, and he can’t be trusted in a shithouse with a muzzle on. This New World Order desciple and wanna to be leader, has brought a lot of nasty ideas against the people of America. A vote for this MORON is a vote to destroy our way of life and country, he is deep down a Socialist, he like Bama has their own ideas for America and neither one of them have a clue about the Constitution or the people! Send this clown packing, he was kicked out of Congress for being a crook and if you think people change look at Ted Kennedy and John Murtha CROOKS and LIARS till their death, Newt is NO DIFFERENT! I live in Georgia and I remember what he did to his first wife and how he didn’t care! Semper Fi.

  8. People also forget that Newt married his teacher to dodge the draft, you want a draft doger for your leader, NOT. He IS A BUM! Send him back to the rat hole he crawled out of.
    Semper Fi.

  9. Mr. Bailey, I respect your reasoning and comments. However, I am a personal witness to the conversion of people, and in conversion within myself. If Newt Gingrich ran against Obama, I would vote for Newt Gingrich in a heartbeat. Semper Fi to you as well.

  10. I have yet to read all the comments but it is no matter. What I am about to say is the truth. I know Sage…and some others can back me up here. It matters not WHAT religion one claims to be…it is a RELATIONSHIP with Jesus Christ that matters. Once you have this relationship…old things are passed away and behold…all things are become new. You turn from your sin. You don’t continue to live in it. You live be what Jesus mandates in the BIBLE if you are a believer. Not by traditions, customs and lies…not by putting on a false front. You will be known by your fruits. Your sins WILL find you out. What you do in the dark shall be brought into the light and no matter what…prayer works. Trust in the Lord, pray and He will reveal all!

  11. Also…if and when confronted about the past…and asked to clarify, if Newt is a new creature in Christ…he will admit to his lies. Somebody I offended 40 years ago found me recently. I remembered…admitted and asked for forgiveness. The rest is up to the Lord…but the person did forgive me. I didn’t try to deny anything.

    • Patriot & Joan,
      I’m more than willing to consider that Newt has genuinely repented and reformed. However, since he hasn’t been in public life for some time, we have no record of his behaviors that can provide evidence that he is now transformed. Instead, he means to catapult from political retirement straight to the White House, and asks that we just believe and trust him. Reason and prudence demand that I require more than that.

      • Eo….I am not defending Newt. I was only merely stating what a person who is a true Christian does and we will know them by their fruits. I trust NEITHER party if the truth be known! I believe that the Lord is setting the stage for the anti-Christ and no person that is put in office will change it!


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.