|
I really hope you GOPers don't support protecting a sexual predator
|
View this Thread in Original format
| MisterOpus1 |
| quote: | FBI to Examine Foley's E-Mails
Hastert Calls For Independent Probe
By Charles Babington and Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, October 2, 2006; Page A01
The FBI announced last night that it is looking into whether former representative Mark Foley (R-Fla.) broke federal law by sending inappropriate e-mails and instant messages to teenage House pages.
The announcement came hours after House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert asked for a Justice Department investigation into not only Foley's actions but also Congress's handling of the matter once it learned of the contacts.
In his letter to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, Hastert (R-Ill.) acknowledged that some of Foley's most sexually explicit instant messages were sent to former House pages in 2003. That was two years before lawmakers say they learned of a more ambiguous 2005 e-mail that led only to a quiet warning to Foley to leave pages alone.
Foley, 52, abruptly resigned Friday, and Democrats have since been hammering Hastert and other GOP leaders. They have accused Republicans of covering up the matter and allowing Foley to remain as co-chair of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus instead of launching an inquiry and possibly uncovering the raunchier communications.
As the scandal broke, Hastert contended he learned of concerns about Foley only last week. But after Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds (R-N.Y.) said Saturday that he had notified Hastert months ago of Foley's e-mails to a 16-year-old boy, the speaker did not dispute his colleague, and Hastert's office acknowledged that some aides knew last year that Foley had been ordered to cease contact with the youth.
Republican leaders continued to insist yesterday that it was understandable that the "over-friendly" Internet e-mails they had seen did not set off alarm bells. But one House GOP leadership aide, speaking on the condition of anonymity for fear of losing his job, conceded that Republicans had erred in not notifying the three-member, bipartisan panel that oversees the page system. Instead, they left it to the panel chairman, Rep. John M. Shimkus (R-Ill.), to confront Foley.
Also yesterday, a former House page said that at a 2003 page reunion, he saw sexually suggestive e-mails Foley had sent to another former page. Patrick McDonald, 21, now a senior at Ohio State University, said he eventually learned of "three or four" pages from his 2001-2002 class who were sent such messages.
He said he remembered saying at the reunion, "If this gets out, it will destroy him.".....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...6100100644.html
|
There are so many ing disturbing events that are slowly transpiring here about this it's difficult to know where exactly to start. But let me again emphasize a critical piece of info:
| quote: | House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) was notified early this year of inappropriate e-mails from former representative Mark Foley (R-Fla.) to a 16-year-old page, a top GOP House member said yesterday -- contradicting the speaker's assertions that he learned of concerns about Foley only last week....
Yesterday's developments revealed a rift at the highest echelons of House Republican ranks a month before the Nov. 7 elections, and they threatened to expand the scandal to a full-blown party dilemma.
Only after Reynolds's definitive statement did Hastert concede yesterday that he may have been notified of some of the questionable activities of Foley....
Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, questioned yesterday why Alexander had gone to the House Republicans' chief political operative, rather than to other party leaders. "That's to protect a member, not to protect a child," Emanuel said.
With his statement, Reynolds, who is locked in a difficult reelection campaign, signaled he was unwilling to take the fall alone amid partisan attacks that were becoming increasingly vituperative....
Republican insiders said Reynolds spoke out because he was angry that Hastert appeared willing to let him take the blame for the party leadership's silence.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...93001265_2.html |
That does not look good for Hastert one bit.
It gets worse. Rep. Shimcus (R) from Illinois knew and allowed Foley to spend "a lot of time" with pages AFTER he knew of Foley's predatory habits:
http://americablog.blogspot.com/200...-let-foley.html
Shimcus had said that he had seen those emails about Foley:
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...2F?OpenDocument
Yet according to Hastert's office and Shimcus' office, Shimcus DIDN'T see them:
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/010070.php
Oops.
Oh, but don't let that stop the GOP from taking Foley's campaign contributions for other GOP candidates, though:
| quote: | Mr. Foley, who served on the House Ways and Means Committee, was a prolific fund-raiser. His campaign account had a balance of $2.7 million at the end of August, according to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission.
Carl Forti, the communications director for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said Sunday that the committee would gladly accept Mr. Foley’s money or a portion of it to devote to House races. Mr. Foley already gave $100,000 to the committee in July, campaign records show, as part of the party’s Battleground Program, to which members are asked to contribute.
“The money is in the control of Mr. Foley,” Mr. Forti said. “Whatever he decides to do with it is up to him.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/02/w...artner=homepage |
Yeah, truly shocking, ain't it?
I will say that it is nice to see some conservative bloggers step up and separate themselves from the shills:
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com...ives/008180.php
As for others, well, to the very bitter end they fall right in lockstep I guess:
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/015429.php
Inexcusable.
Now we are led to believe that Hastert has notified the DOJ to start an investigation going. But something doesn't smell quite right about Hastert here, considering he's pretty much deep in the muck himself.
It doesn't take too long to realize Hastert's dodging his involvement pretty damn good. If anything, his letter itself to the DOJ is more incriminating than anything else out there. Here's Hastert's letter:
http://www.rollcall.com/issues/1_1/...ws/15264-1.html
Now read through that closely, someone, anyone for 's sake and tell me exactly where Hastert is asking the DOJ to examine whether the GOP leaders failed to take action against Foley despite knowing his illegal sexual predatory behavior. Found it yet?
Funny, neither did I.
Greenwald has the analysis here for more reading on the issue:
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/...nces-cover.html
In short, this stinks bad. Hastert is in a serious ing bind here, and any Republican who blindly supports this behavior given this pretty seriously damning evidence so far is nothing shy of insane. I know you guys who carry the morals torch so high don't need a scandal like this a few weeks out before the election, but all I can say is you brought it upon yourselves and made it worse by attempting a cover-up.
Then again, I suppose we could always talk about Iraq........ |
|
|
| Shakka |
No defense from me, Opus. But hey, it's not like he killed anybody...cough cough...Teddy Kennedy..cough cough. Wanna compare embarassing incidents from the political world? What is it with politicians and those damn interns?!?!
Seriously though--I read an IM conversation from the guy. Wow. Pretty blatant. Get him the outa there.
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/BrianRoss...=2509586&page=1 |
|
|
| josh4 |
wow that guys busted
that has to loose them florida
Randy "Duke" Cunningham of California after pleading guilty to accepting $2.4 million in bribes.
Majority leader Tom DeLay of Texas, indicted on state campaign finance violations.
Bob Ney of Ohio, guilty of corruption.
Mark Foley, child predator.
Under investigation:
Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.) Corruption
Sen. Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), Insider Trading
Rep. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), Corruption
Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.), Corruption
Republicans sure know how to pick the winners!
(check out the wiki for Dennis Hastert, the bulk of the article are listed controversies hes had apart in) |
|
|
| occrider |
 |
|
|
| DJ Shibby |
THIS STORY IS A DIVERSIONARY TACTIC TO TAKE THE MEDIA AWAY FROM THE EVIL BILL THAT PASSED FRIDAY.
mmm caps.
You'd think we'd know by now when the government is trying to bull us... soon they will not need to.
As a matter of fact, most of us on this forum who live in America can now be legally arrested and tortured and sent to the detention camps at the whim of the federal government. Yay! |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ Shibby
THIS STORY IS A DIVERSIONARY TACTIC TO TAKE THE MEDIA AWAY FROM THE EVIL BILL THAT PASSED FRIDAY.
mmm caps.
You'd think we'd know by now when the government is trying to bull us... soon they will not need to.
As a matter of fact, most of us on this forum who live in America can now be legally arrested and tortured and sent to the detention camps at the whim of the federal government. Yay! |
I dunno about it being a diversionary tactic. I think this is going to them more than the detention camp legislation when the elections roll around.
TBH, half of this country doesn't care about the legislation because they've been brainwashed into thinking it's for their own protection, but everyone cares about a sex scandal. Kind of sad, but that seems to be how it works here. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| Anybody remember Gerry Studds? He was a Democrat congressman from Massachusetts. In 1983 Studds, and a Republican named Dan Crane were both caught having sexual relations with pages. Crane a 17-year-old female, Studds a 17-year-old male. Both admitted their wrongdoing ... and the House Ethics Committee decided to do nothing more than issue a reprimand to both. |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
Anybody remember Gerry Studds? He was a Democrat congressman from Massachusetts. In 1983 Studds, and a Republican named Dan Crane were both caught having sexual relations with pages. Crane a 17-year-old female, Studds a 17-year-old male. Both admitted their wrongdoing ... and the House Ethics Committee decided to do nothing more than issue a reprimand to both. |
I actually first heard of these two yesterday, since I was 3 when this happened. At 17, both of them were over the age of consent. The interesting aspect of these cases is summed up below
| quote: | Greenfield: Could Foley's follies hurt the GOP?
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Well, it's October, so -- surprise! The most politically explosive writing to hit Washington last week wasn't what's in Bob Woodward's pages. It was those alleged e-mails between Mark Foley and at least a couple of congressional pages and what the House Republican leadership did or didn't do back last fall.
If you want one clue about the political fallout from all this, you can look back more than 20 years ago.
In 1983, the House Ethics Committee revealed that two House members had been sexually involved with pages: liberal Massachusetts Democrat Gerry Studds and conservative Illinois Republican Daniel Crane. Crane was involved with a female, Studds a male; both pages were over the legal age of consent. Both Studds and Crane were censured by the House, but their responses -- and their political fates -- were very different.
Crane was repentant; tearfully apologized to his wife and family, asked for forgiveness.
As the rules require, he stood in the well of the House to receive his censure and faced his colleagues.
By contrast, Studds was unrepentant. He said the relationship was legal and consensual, talked about the difficulties of being a gay man in America, and when the House censured him, he turned his back on his colleagues, as if to reject their censure.
The next year, Crane, who had been an outspoken advocate of "family values," was soundly defeated by voters in his conservative district. Studds was re-elected handily, and served in the House for more than a dozen years, until his retirement.
What's the relevance? Well, consider the role of social conservatives, like those who attended the recent Family Research Council gathering in Washington. They fill the ranks of GOP turnout operations at election time. Some, like James Dobson of "Focus on the Family," have already expressed disappointment in how Republicans have treated their priorities, like gay marriage and abortion.
As the earlier scandal shows, such conservatives are particularly likely to punish sexual misbehavior. And if they conclude that top Republican leaders did not pursue such behavior when they learned of it, the political consequences -- diminished enthusiasm, lower turnouts -- could be severe.
The specifics of this issue are entangled in dispute: Were the earlier, alleged sexually explicit communications leaked with a political agenda in mind? Did the leadership see only the less explicit communications?
But the campaign season does not deal well with subtleties. If this story ends up convincing social conservatives that the Republican Party has let them down, a lot of the calculations about what will happen in November go right out the window
Source |
|
|
|
| Temperate |
| Why the hell are sexual predators being elected into office. Where are the background checks, and psychological exams? If we did that, I don't think half of our elected officials would be in office. |
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Temperate
Why the hell are sexual predators being elected into office. Where are the background checks, and psychological exams? If we did that, I don't think half of our elected officials would be in office. |
Are you joking? Of all the places to start having background checks and pysch exams, politicians aren't near the top of my list. These people have less private exposure to children than most Americans.
Some things you just can't prevent because people have no prior record of this sort of behavior. The only way you'd even come close to dealing with this behavior with more certainty is if we lived in 1984.
BTW, these guys have pretty thorough background checks already. It's called their opponents, which is a lot more scrutiny than teachers or doctors receive. |
|
|
| Shakka |
I'm NOT defending Foley.
| quote: | Paging Mr. Hastert
October 3, 2006; Page A26
Florida Republican Mark Foley's sexually explicit emails to a Congressional page certainly warranted his resignation from the House, and they may well merit prosecution. But this being five weeks from an election, the GOP House leadership is also being assailed for not having come down more strongly on a gay Congressman for showing a more than friendly interest in underage boys. That's a different issue altogether.
At least this seems to be the essence of the Democratic and media charge against Speaker Dennis Hastert, who admits his office was told months ago about a friendly, non-explicit 2005 email exchange between Mr. Foley and another page. In that exchange, Mr. Foley had asked the teenager "how old are you now" and requested "an email pic."
In our admittedly traditional view, this was odd and suspect behavior, especially because Mr. Foley was well known as a homosexual even if he declined to publicly acknowledge it. And Mr. Hastert was informed that fellow Illinois Republican John Shimkus -- who oversees the page program as part of a six-member board -- spoke privately with Mr. Foley, who explained that the email was innocent.
What next was Mr. Hastert supposed to do with an elected Congressman? Assume that Mr. Foley was a potential sexual predator and bar him from having any private communication with pages? Refer him to the Ethics Committee? In retrospect, barring contact with pages would have been wise.
But in today's politically correct culture, it's easy to understand how senior Republicans might well have decided they had no grounds to doubt Mr. Foley merely because he was gay and a little too friendly in emails. Some of those liberals now shouting the loudest for Mr. Hastert's head are the same voices who tell us that the larger society must be tolerant of private lifestyle choices, and certainly must never leap to conclusions about gay men and young boys. Are these Democratic critics of Mr. Hastert saying that they now have more sympathy for the Boy Scouts' decision to ban gay scoutmasters? Where's Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on that one?
Mr. Foley's explicit emails -- which were sent to a former page who had returned home -- clearly crossed the line into "vile and repulsive," as Mr. Hastert put it yesterday. And the Floridian has now resigned in disgrace and is being criminally investigated. This is harsher treatment than was meted out in the past to some Members of Congress who crossed another line and actually had sexual relations with underage pages. Democrat Gerry Studds of Massachusetts was censured in 1983 for seducing a male teenage page, but remained in the House for another 13 years and retired, according to the Boston Globe, with a rich pension.
Mr. Foley lied to many people over the years, most notably to himself. It's one of those human mysteries that someone so prominent, and so active as a spokesman against sexual predators, would send emails that he knew would destroy his career if they became public. That kind of psychoanalysis is above our pay grade.
Yes, Mr. Hastert and his staff should have done more to quarantine Mr. Foley from male pages after the first email came to light. But if that's the standard, we should all admit we are returning to a rule of conduct that our cultural elite long ago abandoned as intolerant. |
|
|
|
| Groundhog Boy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
I'm NOT defending Foley. |
The reason they're attacking him is because it shows the Republicans as hypocrites, not because they have an issue with his orientation. |
|
|
|
|
