RELATED: Rep. Ron Paul Tells Univisión He Might Oppose 14th Amendment Birthright Citizenship

“I take full responsibility for these questions,” Ramos began, so as to distance himself from his channel before challenging Gingrich on personal questions. “When you were Speaker of the House, you criticized President Clinton for having an extramarital affair.” “No,” replied Gingrich, “I criticized him for lying under oath in front of a federal judge, for committing perjury, which is a felony for which normal people go to jail.” Ramos continued his question, however, stating that Gingrich was doing the same thing. “I was not doing the same thing– you didn’t hear my answer.”

“Many people think that is hypocritical.” Gingrich responded that that was true because “they listen to your question, but they don’t listen to the facts.” Gingrich did not go on to attack Ramos, however, in the way one would expect him to attack, say, John King. Instead, he fleshed out his answer. “Look, I’ve been through two divorces, I’ve been deposed both times, under oath. I’m not a lawyer, and I know it’s a felony. Clinton is a lawyer, from Yale Law School, and he knew it was a felony.” When Ramos repeated that that wasn’t exactly assuaging anyone’s concerns about his character, Gingrich replied with vintage Gingrich: “somewhere here there is a synapse missing. I didn’t do the same thing; I never lied under oath.”

Ramos then left that topic and went into even murkier waters, but asked the question in a way that left him completely protected from a Gingrich attack, asking why he blamed the media for exposing the “open marriage” question, and whether he believed it to be a legitimate concern. Gingrich attacked ABC for the story, and Ramos continued, “Isn’t that a fair question about your character? That’s the kind of question that we have to ask.” Gingrich agreed. “Have I blamed you for asking? No.” He went on to explain, again, that the open marriage claim was “a lie” and then turned to the John King incident: “The CNN commentator decided to make it the first question in a national presidential debate, and I thought to myself– ‘we have unemployment, we have immigration, we have Afghanistan… and this guy thinks that this kind of trash should be the first question in a presidential debate?’”

The exchange is fascinating for two reasons– the first being that it is the first time that Gingrich addresses the Clinton comparison head-on during this election cycle, and does it without sniping at the interviewer. The second is the latter in general. Ramos figured out what many in the media have yet to about Gingrich: if you present yourself as a separate entity from “the media” (much easier for Ramos to do as a Univisión correspondent than those in English-language cable news positions, to be fair), Gingrich will take the bait and attack the strawman, rather than treating you, the interviewer, as a member of the “other” group of media. Not only does it give Ramos the ability to come off looking like the most talented matador getting in the ring with Gingrich so far, waving the red flag of infidelity unscathed, but it gives Gingrich the opportunity to prove that he can have a civil conversation with a journalist without trying to make them look foolish– a win-win for both parties. Ramos also sat down with the other Republican candidates for similar interviews, so we can expect more of these as the week rolls on.

The segment via Univisión below:

The interview served as an introduction to Latino viewers to Rep. Paul and consisted mostly of basic questions on his views, mostly on immigration and foreign policy. The first half of the interview discussed immigration exclusively, and Ramos opened with a general question on Rep. Paul’s views. “Somebody who has been here… it’s their country, I think there should be a program to bring them into the fold,” Rep. Paul noted, supporting a program to help illegal immigrants reach an acceptable migration status. That said, he made the point that he was not in favor of amnesty or helping anyone cut in line. Furthermore, Rep. Paul made the point that he wasn’t entirely comfortable with Fourteenth Amendment birthright citizenship. “I think the mere fact of stepping across the border and having a child… no, I don’t think that should be automatic,” he noted. He did add that, as a doctor, he had seen a great number of cases where mothers crossed the border specifically to assure their child American citizenship.

RELATED: Rep. Ron Paul Lists Ideal Federal Powers At GOP Forum: ‘Not A Heck Of A Lot’

Ramos immediately asked whether this meant that Rep. Paul “wanted to change the Constitution,” a valid question, but one that for anyone following the Rep. Paul campaign for the past few years will find is a rare doubt about the candidate– in fact, adherence to the Constitution is the one most pervasive talking point of both the 2008 and 2012 Paul campaigns. “Depends on how you interpret the Constitution,” Rep. Paul retorted, suggesting that the Fourteenth Amendment applied only to those “under the jurisdiction– if you’re illegal, you might not be considered under the jurisdiction of the United States government.”

Ramos then wonders whether Rep. Paul is afraid his stance on immigration will alienate Latino voters, arguing that Latinos by and large support amnesty measures (a claim that by and large alienates the public opinion of Caribbean Latinos), to which Rep. Paul responds that he finds it “unnecessary” to modify his messages to reach an ethnic group. He also shoots down the idea of heightening gun control restrictions to stop illegal immigrant related violence, and instead hinted at– without fleshing out– his drug policies.

RELATED: Rick Santorum Tells Rep. Ron Paul To Stop ‘Parroting Osama Bin Laden’ At CNN Debate

The position may shock a few of Rep. Paul’s libertarian supporters who look upon open borders with a bit more warmth, particularly since his positions on drugs and foreign military intervention have gotten so much more exposure. It is also a particularly bizarre choice on Rep. Paul’s part to expose his concern about birthright citizenship, which doesn’t appear on his official immigration platform, to the one audience that would be most likely to consider him as a candidate based on his positions on immigration.

The segment via Univisión below:

Watch it here, from Univision:

The guest list got more attention after sniping among the White House press corps that Univision got the only question at a press conference with Obama and Calderon.  The Hill’s Sam Youngman tweeted and Politico’s Patrick Gavin whined that U.S. press were shut out of the questions.  White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was more than happy to point out, via a tweet, that Univision was actually an American network.

The guest list includes Univision anchors María Elena Salinas and Jorge Ramos, as well as their rival on Telemundo, José Díaz-Balart. Also on the guest list is Monica Lozano, publisher of Los Angeles daily newspaper La Opinion and Victor Pérez of Chicago’s Hoy. Former network anchor and reporter Giselle Fernandez also made the cut.

While the regular networks were shut out of the event–save ABC’s Bianna Golodryga who is the fiancee of Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag–there are other television celebrities including Whoopi Goldberg, Eva Longoria-Parker and George Lopez. Oprah’s BFF Gayle King is attending as the guest of Newark, N.J., mayor Cory Booker.

After the first state dinner, which became famous for being crashed by reality-show wannabes Tareq and Michaele Salahi, security has been tight for the event and the guest list didn’t become public until late in the day. The dinner is being planned and prepared by celebrity chef and friend-of-the-Obamas Rick Bayless, who started the day feuding with Chicago Sun-Times writer Lynn Sweet, who said Bayless was tweeting against protocol.