Gingrich Calls Clinton Impeachment Over Lewinsky a Mistake

Gingrich calls – Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Wednesday that impeaching President Bill Clinton over his affair with Monica Lewinsky was a “mistake,” arguing the true issue was Clinton’s alleged perjury tied to a separate sexual-harassment case involving Paula Jones.
Newt Gingrich didn’t frame it as a debate over history. He called it what he said it was—“a mistake”—and he connected that verdict to a moment that still sounds vivid in his telling.
Speaking Wednesday in an interview with New York Post reporter Miranda Devine on her Pod Force One podcast, the former Republican House Speaker was asked whether it “was a mistake to impeach [Clinton] over the” Lewinsky scandal. Gingrich answered plainly: “I think it was a mistake.”
He then laid out his reasoning in sharp terms. “The real problem wasn’t Lewinsky,” he said. “The real problem was he committed perjury in a case involving sexual harassment when he was governor. And perjury’s a felony.”
Gingrich’s reference points back to the Paula Jones matter. Jones accused Clinton of propositioning her in a hotel room in 1991. including exposing himself and asking her to perform oral sex. Jones sued Clinton in 1994 for sexual harassment, and the case was later settled out of court in 1998. Clinton denied the allegations.
Gingrich said he realized—during the summer of 1998—that the impeachment strategy was heading in the wrong direction. He recalled being in a cafe. eating with his two daughters. when the weight of the political decision landed on him. He said they warned him that if friends “lose money on their 401K because of some stupid intern. ” they would be angry—“because frankly it ain’t a big enough deal for us to lose a lot of money.”.
At that point, Gingrich said, he recognized he had misread how the culture was shifting. “I realized at that point I had completely misunderstood how the culture was evolving,” he added.
Devine responded with her own framing—suggesting the impeachment offered Democrats a talking point about the political system and retaliation. “Wow. ” she said. before adding. “and I guess also it meant that the Democrats had a talking point. which was you impeached our president over a triviality. therefore anything goes in the future.”.
Gingrich said he didn’t accept that the comparison necessarily justified broad Democratic follow-through. He pointed out that Democrats didn’t try to impeach George W. Bush (R) while he was in office.
Then came the part of his argument that is meant to sting. Gingrich said the impeachment backfired and left Clinton departing office “at the high point of his popularity.” He added that “the numbers largely back up” that claim. pointing to a poll from late 2000 that found Clinton had a 67% approval rating. close to his all-time high.
Gingrich wrapped the recollection in a blunt image of what public arguments about “triviality” can miss. “You know that you didn’t necessarily want your daughter to go out on a date with him, but that didn’t matter,” he said.
The admission lands as a reminder that, even years later, the impeachment of Clinton remains a live argument among political insiders—one where the question is not only what happened, but what it cost, and for whom.
Newt Gingrich Bill Clinton Monica Lewinsky impeachment Paula Jones perjury sexual harassment Pod Force One Miranda Devine 1998
So he’s saying it was a mistake… but Clinton shouldn’t have done any of it, period.
I don’t even remember the timeline right. Lewinsky, Paula Jones, perjury… they’re all just different flavors of the same scandal though. Perjury felonies sounds like something you’d have to actually prove.
Wait so Gingrich is basically blaming the impeachment on “losing money on their 401k”?? That sounds like rich people drama. Also I thought Lewinsky was the main thing, not some governor sexual harassment thing.
Newt always talks like he was the mastermind. If it was “a mistake” then why did they push it so hard back then? And the perjury part… I mean didn’t he deny the whole Paula Jones thing anyway? Sounds like politics trying to rewrite history to make it sound smarter now, like “oh we realized too late” or whatever.