No one needs to wonder about that because Byron York has written the comprehensive examination of the matter at the Washington Examiner:

Given all the attention to the ethics matter, it’s worth asking what actually happened back in 1995, 1996, and 1997. The Gingrich case was extraordinarily complex, intensely partisan, and driven in no small way by a personal vendetta on the part of one of Gingrich’s former political opponents. It received saturation coverage in the press; a database search of major media outlets revealed more than 10,000 references to Gingrich’s ethics problems during the six months leading to his reprimand. It ended with a special counsel hired by the House Ethics Committee holding Gingrich to an astonishingly strict standard of behavior, after which Gingrich in essence pled guilty to two minor offenses. Afterwards, the case was referred to the Internal Revenue Service, which conducted an exhaustive investigation into the matter. And then, after it was all over and Gingrich was out of office, the IRS concluded that Gingrich did nothing wrong. After all the struggle, Gingrich was exonerated.

Byron York’s article can be read in it’s entirety here.

Eddie Haskell Mitt Romney is distorting the history here for political gain, but not nearly as bad as the risible and vicious and false characterization that Nancy Pelosi, a loathsome toad of a woman, is doing in this video. “There’s something I know…” she says. It’s time for the term “Pelosism” to take it’s place in the America’s political lexicon, right next to “McCarthyism.”

UPDATE:  Romney is trying to capitalize on the toad’s claim to know something but a spokesman for the toad says she doesn’t know anything not already in the public domain.  What’s in the public domain is that Newt was cleared of all wrongdoing by the IRS. Professor Jacobson says:  “Newt only sat on the couch with Pelosi, but Romney’s getting in bed with her.”