<p>"I think Studds should have resigned, Barney Frank should have resigned, and Clinton should have resigned. "</p>
<p>And Giuliani? And Newt Gingrich? </p>
<p>I’m STILL waiting. What’s the reluctance? Sex with your extracurricular babe in the Mayor’s mansion for months (when you are not even separated) with your 8-year-old in the house? Leaving wives sick with cancer and multiple sclerosis to sleep around?</p>
<p>Frankly, when it comes to sex, Bill Clinton is positively angelic in comparison. But no need to compare - 'cause Rudy and Newt are members of the party of family values.</p>
<p>I would imagine it’s because that’s the chain of command. The mid-level Microsoft manager doesn’t go to Bill Gates with problems, s/he goes to his/her supervisor. In this case, the parents of the page complained to their Congressman who went to his GOP “supervisor” and it was handled from there - including escalating it by bringing in the Congressman in charge of the Page program and someone from the Clerk’s office, the agency responsible for pages. </p>
<p>To call a committees, sub-committee, or caucus meeting takes, literally, an Act of Congress. Having said that, protecting these pages should be a top priority and I wish they had done more here. But I haven’t seen anything in the initial emails that make me think the GOP leaders should have done more than they did.</p>
<p>DRJ4:
In what way was Reynolds Alexanders’s supervisor. He was not at all in the chain of command for the pages. He was chairman of the Republican CAMPAIGN Committee.</p>
<p>I know next to nothing about the Clerk of the House. Anecdotally, I recall seeing Ms. Haas nominated and sworn in as Clerk of the House when it was broadcast on C-Span. She was the recipient of warm endorsements from both sides of the aisle for her competence and bipartisanship, but that could be Washington spin. As I recall, she served as the Assistant Clerk for some time prior to her nomination so I don’t think she came straight from Hastert’s office in recent times. </p>
<p>Of course, I’m sure others noticed this but the names given for the Clerk don’t match up. The articles provided earlier in this thread referred to someone named Tradahl, not Haas, so I assume someone is wrong or that the initial action by Shimkus included an employee of the Clerk’s office, not the Clerk. In addition, I don’t know if the Clerk’s employees are hand-chosen or civil service employees.</p>
<p>DRJ4, I’ll take you at your word that you don’t have the experience with sexual misconduct issues to recognize grooming behavior when you see it. You’re fortunate to have been sheltered, and I suppose you’ve never worked as a teacher, social worker, or in any other capacity that requires training on abuse prevention. </p>
<p>But when an adult who barely knows a child initiates contact asking for pictures and age, offering a gift, and talking about what a great body another child has, particularly when this contact is outside of normal channels, such as a business email address, it raises a big red flag to anyone who has educated him or herself about sexual predators. And members of Congress, specifically a member of Congress who has been a teacher and Chairs the Page Board should be educated on these issues. It’s bare minimum competence for those positions. I have a hard time believing that Shimkus was as incompetent as you make him out to be…and if he is, he has no business being in charge of the pages and should relinquish the post immediately.</p>
<p>Yes, I realize that but there are still political parties in Washington. If I were a Congressman with a problem raised by a constituent, I would notify the next person up in my Party. The fact that it went up the chain of command to the appropriate person(s) supervising the page program is a good thing, don’t you think? This was referred to the Clerk of the House and to the Congressman in charge of the Page program. </p>
<p>Of course, if the facts turn out that it was all a sham, as some here believe, that is pathetic. But I haven’t seen proof of a sham or a cover-up based on the response to the emails.</p>
<p>"A Republican staff member warned congressional pages five years ago to watch out for Congressman Mark Foley, according to a former page.</p>
<p>Matthew Loraditch, a page in the 2001-2002 class, told ABC News he and other pages were warned about Foley by a supervisor in the House Clerk’s office.</p>
<p>Loraditch, the president of the Page Alumni Association, said the pages were told “don’t get too wrapped up in him being too nice to you and all that kind of stuff.”</p>
<p>Staff members at the House Clerk’s office did not return calls seeking comment.</p>
<p>Some of the sexually explicit instant messages that led to Foley’s abrupt resignation Friday were sent to pages in Loraditch’s class.</p>
<p>Pages report to either Republican or Democratic supervisors, depending on the political party of the member of Congress who nominate them for the page program.</p>
<p>Several Democratic pages tell ABC News they received no such warnings about Foley.</p>
<p>Loraditch says that some of the pages who “interacted” with Foley were hesitant to report his behavior because “members of Congress, they’ve got the power.” Many of the pages were hoping for careers in politics and feared Foley might seek retribution.</p>
<p>Loraditch runs the alumni association for the U.S. House Page Program, and he is deeply concerned about the future effects this scandal could have on a program that he sees as a valuable educational experience for teens.</p>
<p><a href=“Page Not Found | University of South Dakota”>http://www.usd.edu/ctrcivic/jeff.cfm</a>
Jeff Trandahl, a native of Spearfish, South Dakota, is a 1983 graduate of Spearfish High School. He received a Bachelor of Arts in Government/Politics (with an emphasis in English) from the University of Maryland in 1987. Professional experience includes: Office of United States Senator James Abdnor (R-SD) from 1983 to 1987; Office of Congresswoman Virginia Smith (R-NE) and the House Committee on Appropriations from 1987 to 1990; Office of Congressman Pat Roberts (R–KS) and the Committee on House Administration from 1990 to 1995; Assistant to the Clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives from 1995 to 1996; Chief Administrative Officer (acting) for the U.S. House of Representatives from 1996 to 1997; Deputy Clerk of the House of Representatives from 1997 to 1999; he was appointed Clerk of the House of Representatives on January 1, 1999, and elected Clerk of the House of Representatives on January 6, 1999. He is involved in various social and professional organizations.**</p>
<p>DRJ:
My point is that Reynolds was not above Alexander in the chain of command in any way whatsoever (only in the sense that he doled out the $100,000 donated by Foley to the other Republicans)</p>
<p>Thank you, Mini. It’s interesting that Hastert has lost the support of the Washington Times’ editors. It makes me suspicious that they know more information wil be forthcoming.</p>
<p>DRJ4, I was responding in good faith. I took you at your word that you didn’t recognize the emails as grooming behavior that needed to be followed up on, and that you didn’t expect the Chairman to either. Isn’t that your point, that you saw nothing in the emails to warrant investigation beyond just asking Foley if he did anything wrong? </p>
<p>It was by no means meant as a criticism of you that I didn’t think you caught the grooming subtext. In my experience, good people tend to think well of other people and to give others the maximum benefit of the doubt because wrong-doing is so alien to them. There are many fine people who read the original emails and saw nothing wrong; I know some of them (like my mom :)), and think highly of them. But I don’t doubt that if any of them were to take on a grave responsibility like overseeing the welfare of 100 kids far from home, they would get the education they needed to do the job, and would conduct themselves a heck of a lot better than Shimkus.</p>
<p>If I’ve somehow misunderstood you, I apologize, but I don’t see how my interpretation of what you said casts you in a bad light.</p>
<p>For the record, I comprehend that the Foley emails (as opposed to the IMs) are troubling but that does not make them actionable. I’m gratified to read that someone decided to keep a closer watch on Foley and others in Congress who have raised suspicion in their dealings with the pages, but I am disgusted that it’s necessary to do that.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, the American justice system is not a civil law system designed to prevent all adversity; It is a common law system that reacts to specific cases and attempts to resolve them. We balance procedural safeguards (like requiring accusers to come forward and provide evidence) with rules designed to protect society (especially children and those less able to protect themselves). </p>
<p>Newt Gingrich did resign in 1998 from his position as Speaker due to mounting complaints from Republicans some of which may have had to do with his long-standing affair with a House aide, I believe.</p>
<p>Speaker designate Bob Livingston resigned before being sworn in as Speaker, due to Republican complaints of his adultery.</p>
<p>I am not up to speed on the Guiliani story. I know nothing about it except what you’ve provided here, which is why I haven’t commented on it.</p>
<p>Do we know how Brian Ross got hold of the IM’s yet?</p>