Bloomberg investigates and finds that Gingrich was paid much more by Freddie Mac than previously reported. Gingrich says that he’s bound by a confidentiality agreement, but is "very happy to offer people strategic advice if they come and ask my advice." Jennifer Rubin implores him to come clean:
Freddie Mac isn’t commenting on the record and isn’t releasing documents to establish Gingrich’s role. This is inexcusable. To the extent there is a confidentiality agreement (why would Freddie demand his work be a secret?), Freddie and Gingrich can waive it. Gingrich is running for president, telling an improbable tale (he alone among a flock of hired guns wasn’t engaged in influence peddling?) and refusing to provide voters with material needed to assess his credibility. This is precisely the Gingrich so many Republicans recall — self-important, truth-shading and continually on the make to feather his own nest.
Friedersdorf thinks he should return the money. Benjy Sarlin reports that Gingrich demanded an investigation into policymakers with ties to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in 2008. Ed Morrissey assesses the damage:
It’s possible that Gingrich supported Congressional pressure on Fannie and Freddie to expand home ownership in 1999-2002 during his first round with Freddie, and then changed his mind during his second consultation period. … Even so, the fact that Gingrich had such a lengthy consulting relationship with such a toxic organization might be enough to turn off Republican voters. The nexus of power and big business is one of the themes of the Tea Party’s efforts at reform, and the ability of the powerful to move into consulting relationships with big-money players like Freddie Mac is one of the symptoms of the problem.
The Dish 