<p>sjmom, I actually have no idea how this will or will not affect the election. Voters tend to have short memories, so something that erupts six weeks before an election may have no effect at all - most probably not in districts outside of Florida. What fascinates me is the casual accusations made by the right that this is all a democrat plot. See Strick89 and Zoosermom’s posts highlighted above where they calmly accuse democrats of knowing all about it and deliberately concealing it until now - in the complete and absolute absence of any evidence of that. This is a GOP issue - Foley is a GOP congressman, and the issue was brought to the attention of the GOP “leaders” who chose not to share it with the Democrat on the page oversight committee, so it’s kind of hard to completely ignore that aspect of the case. But to try to twist it into a deliberate plot by the left - now that takes some doing.</p>
<p>It just takes a little common sense, Kluge. You’ll know it when you stumble across it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Neither of us is defending Foley, right? We’re just discussing the culpablility of people who knew about what was happening and did nothing. Report after report says that Foley’s actions were common knowledge on the Hill. Common to everyone but the Democrats? Really?</p>
<p>I’ll stand by my post. Surely you can’t believe the timing is purely coincidental. </p>
<p>I watched Meet John Doe the other night with my kids. You know the story, it’s about a millionare manipulating the press to futher his own political ambitions. Just because Soros (CREW is funded by Soros, right?) doesn’t want to run for office himself or can’t, being foreign born, doesn’t mean he’s not trying to buy elections. Using blackmail and dirty politics is just as reprehensible now as it was in that movie.</p>
<p>Foley deserves to be brought down. Immediately. Not when it was to someone’s political advantage. Anyone who would withhold this information for that purpose without regard to the danger to the children involved is reprehensible. IF not CREW, then who ever they got it from to give them cover.</p>
<p>Denying that is lefty simply tunnel vision.</p>
<p>BTW, I’d post a link if it weren’t against forum policy. It’s from liberal blog that apparently knew all this last March and promised to take Foley down when the time was right. I think I’ll send it to you via private message. Do you mind?</p>
<p>Do it. I’d like to see it. Send it to the carp, too.</p>
<p>I’d love to see that, too. If you have actual evidence I’ll stand corrected.</p>
<p>—Day 348 of the “common sense” Ronnie Earl disbarment watch.</p>
<p>As my dad used to say, The mills of God grind slowly, yet they grind exceeding small; Though with patience He stands waiting, with exactness He grinds all. (Longfellow was not really my Dad–although he could have been)
Ronnie Earl is every bit your equal as a lawyer, Kluge. Lucky for you that you restrict your legal overtures to internet forums.</p>
<p>wow, strick, seems to me you don’t blame the republican leadership who had the emails and did nothing for months, you don’t think they did anything wrong, but yet, you think those that turned stuff over to the FBI did?</p>
<p>strange logic, if any at all</p>
<p>tak about tunnel vision…the REPUBLICANS had the information, and many of them did…and they did nada…guess that is okay with you> but those that did the right thing and informed the authorities, they did something wrong</p>
<p>k…</p>
<p>The bottom line is that the people who knew first were the GOP leadership… and they also should have known that buried scandals have a tendency of being exposed right before elections. So it was the kind of thing that warranted investigation – and if there is politics at play here, then the GOP has no one but themselves to blame for failing to put an end to the problem when first brought to their attention. They could have dealt with it quietly by urging Foley not to seek re-election… revelations about a lame-duck congressman would not have had much impact on the election.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Right, those people who sat on emails, did not investigate matter, did not ask the pages how “friendly” Mr. Foley was becoming, and who did everything in their power to ignore the issue entirely: Hastert, Reynolds, and co. I have a feeling this is not answer you want, and much like OJ Simpson’s hunt for his wife’s killer, you want the “truth” but not the truth.</p>
<p>There’s not one iota of evidence behind your conspiracy. It certain reiterates how much more important the GOP’s electoral success is than the safety of their pages, in the minds of both Hastert and his ethically challenged supporters here.</p>
<p>They could have dealt with it in 2001, when REPUBLICAN pages were warned by REPUBLICAN staff about a REPUBLICAN perv.</p>
<p>But they didn’t.</p>
<p>(You bet it’s political, and should be. And I say that as someone who isn’t a Democrat.)</p>
<p>“See Strick89 and Zoosermom’s posts highlighted above where they calmly accuse democrats of knowing all about it and deliberately concealing it until now - in the complete and absolute absence of any evidence of that.”</p>
<p>On the contrary, this is supposed to be common knowledge, I just don’t think that “common knowledge” is limited by party lines. Quite the contrary in a city as political as DC.</p>
<p>As far as I can tell, all we’re hearing are rumors, some rather flagrantly slanted, about who know what and did what. I don’t know whether what the House leadership knew was actionable. I’ve seen claims that someone had actionable information in the press before that were flagrant lies. </p>
<p>It sounds like we need an investigation on both sides of the House to me.</p>
<p>That’s all I really want to say, stop playing party politics and demand a level playing field. This is not a GOP leadership issue, it’s a leadership issue. Whoever had actionable evidence of this in advance and didn’t do their duty should be held to the same standards. How can you argue against that?</p>
<p>As for the timing issue, honestly, I have reason to believe that this information was held until just before the election by a liberal organization with malice aforethought. I regret that I might have implied about what any member of the House knew in advance, I honestly don’t know. I do know it was an intentional hatchet job with clear political motivations.</p>
<p>Strick, you’ve sent me a link to a blog by a gay guy who’s ticked off at Foley for what he perceived as an “anti-gay” vote, and threatened to “out” him as a gay man last March. Lots of other people posted, arguing over whether “outing” people was good or bad, whether Foley was really anti-gay or not, blah blah blah. But most just said there was no point in “outing” Foley because
Although there’s a reference to Foley hitting on “men less than half his age at the Republican convention” there’s no references to Congressional pages, or minors, or IM’s, etc. In short, this is nothing. All it means is that lots of people knew Foley was gay - in Washington and in Florida. </p>
<p>I don’t know why you didn’t post a link to the blog itself - to the best of my knowledge that’s not a violation of CC policy - but I’ll respect your wishes and not copy the link here. But it doesn’t supply proof of the wild accusations against the Democratic party leadership. All it shows is that Foley was gay, and lots of people knew it. As discussed ad nauseam above, there’s a world of difference between being gay and being a pedophile.</p>
<p>P.S. What’s supposed to be “common knowledge”?</p>
<p>Is it just me not seeing it or did somebody ARREST Foley yet? I’m starting to hear that because he didn’t complete the act (have sex) he committed no crime? Why can’t he get his 30 days of no alcohol behind bars? </p>
<p>I feel for those of you who defend the leadership and don’t look at them with a critical eye. Politicans are first and foremost there to stay there, community interest if it happens to fit their situation are secondary to getting re-elected or elected. </p>
<p>It’s like those who still believe management theory is to “maximize stockholder wealth”…yea by paying management 4,000 times more what the employees make… ya sure.</p>
<p>If they ignored Foley is one thing, if they manipulated Foley is another. One fault is not doing anything because they thought it was no big deal. It’s another if they knew and controlled the seat to get other things they wanted. Sometimes a secret held is much more powerful than a secret disclosed. Foley needs to be charged and heard in a court of law.</p>
<p>… it has no evidence to be shown</p>
<p>If it was so insidiously calculated, why did this “vast conspiracy” have the news released on Friday, the best day for bad news to break? If I am going to believe any conspiracy, then it would be calculated self-destruction.</p>
<p>We know who finally “leaked” (what a preposterous word) the IM and emails: the pages themselves. You should take it up with them about how they should have keep their little mouths shut until a more convenient time (read: never), but they did the right thing. The “blame-the-victim” mentality is disgusting.</p>
<p>
No, two Florida newspapers knew about the emails as well and after looking into them they decided that they didn’t amount to much so they never even bothered to run a story on it. If newspapers (who never met a potential scandal that the didn’t like) didn’t see anything in this, why should anyone else without the benefit of all of the information that suddenly and miraculously came to light in October of an election year.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That Foley hit on pages and interns. The pages, at least, are all minors. Whoever knew that should be held liable for not acting, just as a teacher or a doctor would. Anyone, regardless of party. </p>
<p>If it was only a matter of Foley being gay, then you’re right, the threat that gay organization (not one person) posted would be meaningless. Why bother making it?</p>
<p>I’m not on solid ground on this I know, but I have to ask again. I confess, I’m shocked at some of the outrage expressed over this. Clearly Foley deserves loosing his seat and prosecution for whatever laws he’s broken, but am I wrong? Is this really not the degree of scandal some are trying to make it out to be?</p>
<p>Consider what it isn’t. Foley was not ■■■■■■■■ Disney sites for 12 year olds. I still haven’t heard that he actually had sex with any minor (has that changed? I’ve been busy this morning). </p>
<p>Is hitting on 16 and 17 year olds really that more outrageous than a member of Congress having sex with a 16 year old girl? Or a female adult teacher having sex with a male teenager? No defending Foley, but I can’t help but wonder if the outrage has something to do with more than just the facts of the case.</p>
<p>As I said earlier, I was once overwhelmed on another forum by liberals who thought it was wrong to prosecute female teachers for having sex with their students. This seems out of proportion.</p>
<p>Strick:
I’m not sure I understand your argument. 1) Foley hitting on pages were common knowledge
2) Democrats should have done something about it
3) GOP leadership, presented with Foley’s emails did nothing because…?</p>
<p>They didn’t want to appear anti-gay?
They were waiting for democrats to take action?
They couldn’t put together the behavior of Foley (common knowledge) with the emails?
everybody kicked it to someone else and washed their hands of the matter?</p>
<p>Saw that about the newspapers, too, fundingfather. The standard a newspaper would need to run a story is well below what someone would need to launch a full investigation. Those early emails must not be quite so incriminating after all.</p>
<p>gla, I think this partially answers your question on why the GOP might not have done something. I don’t really know what anyone knew. If it was nothing more than what these newspapers received, it might not have been responsible to do more with the information.</p>
<p>As for the Democrats, I just want them held to the same level of responsibility that anyone else in the House should be. If someone knew a member was violating the law, hitting on minors, taking bribes, they have a responsiblity to act regardless of party lines.</p>
<p>Turn your question back the other way. If Democrats knew, what was they’re excuse for not bringing it up sooner? You know, like months before the election.</p>
<p>It really is a fair question. But it is based on an assumption that the party of the clueless knew. Might be true, but there isn’t any evidence for it.</p>
<p>We DO know that the party of family values not only knew in 2001, but actually warned Republican pages (but not Democratic ones) about the PFV perv.</p>
<p>
Your question presupposes that Democrats knew. What is your basis for this supposition? As far as I Know CREW turned over the emails to the FBI. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is ABC’s Sauer lying?</p>