Author Topic: Foley-gate congressional perv (Read 5264 times)

lukster · « **Reply #120 on:** October 04, 2006, 10:42:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by rpm
What's so apparent about the Clinton comparison to me? 16 year old. 22 year old.

If you can't tell the difference, you never will.

There really isn't much comparison between Foley and Clinton. One had illicit sex with an underling while the other didn't.

Shuckins · « **Reply #121 on:** October 04, 2006, 11:01:43 PM »

By all accounts, Foley did not have sex with the young man. He didn't solicit sex. He sent him dirty e-mails.

Admittedly, I'm not up on whether or not state or federal or D.C. law defines this as a crime. What DOES the law say about it?

I remember the Gerry Studds incident well. This senator actually did have sex with an underage page, and was blatantly defiant about it. He was censured by the Senate but allowed to keep his seat. And reelected.

It's also kind of hard to believe that Republican senators knew about Foley's foibles for years and the Democrats "didn't have a clue." Now the lid has suddenly been blown off of this scandal, a month away from what is already proving to be a bitter and acrimonious Congressional election.

How convenient....and timely.

I was disgusted by Studd's behavior. I'm equally disgusted by Foley's behavior. Studd's party rallied behind him and helped him remain in office. Foley's party appears to be cutting him loose...in effect leaving him to twist in the wind.

Spin it how you will, the two men have not been treated the same.

In my opinion, both should have been ejected from Congress.

Debonair · « **Reply #122 on:** October 05, 2006, 01:36:08 AM »

i wonder if those 2 ever hoooked up rofl

BTW · « **Reply #123 on:** October 05, 2006, 04:19:11 PM »

This just in- according to Drudge Report, Foley may have be goaded into these conversations with the page. It may have been a prank that fell into the wrong hands. This could blow up in the Democrats face. It becomes suspicious that the "victim" in this case has now retained a defense lawyer. It may be Foley's only crime was being homosexual and the "embrace all" Democratic party may have crucified him for being gay. This story is far from over.

http://www.drudgereport.com/

lukster · « **Reply #124 on:** October 05, 2006, 05:13:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by BTW
This just in- according to Drudge Report, Foley may have be goaded into these conversations with the page. It may have been a prank that fell into the wrong hands. This could blow up in the Democrats face. It becomes suspicious that the "victim" in this case has now retained a defense lawyer. It may be Foley's only crime was being homosexual and the "embrace all" Democratic party may have crucified him for being gay. This story is far from over.

http://www.drudgereport.com/

Only the democrats would buy this and even then only from another democrat.

bj229r · « **Reply #125 on:** October 05, 2006, 07:11:56 PM »

This is starting to get mildly interesting!

Quote

CLAIM: FILTHY FOLEY ONLINE CHATS WERE PAGE 'PRANK GONE AWRY'
**World Exclusive**
**Must Credit the DRUDGE REPORT**

According to two people close to former congressional page Jordan Edmund, the now famous lurid AOL Instant Message exchanges that led to the resignation of Mark Foley were part of an online prank that by mistake got into the hands of enemy political operatives, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal.

According to one Oklahoma source who knows the former page very well, Edmund, a conservative Republican, goaded an unwitting Foley to type embarrassing comments that were then shared with a small group of young Hill politicos. The prank went awry when the saved IM sessions got into the hands of political operatives favorable to Democrats.

The primary source, an ally of Edmund, adamantly proclaims that the former page is not a homosexual. The prank scenario was confirmed by a second associate of Edmund. Both are fearful that their political careers will be affected if they are publicly brought into the investigation.

The prank scenario only applies to the Edmund IM sessions and does not necessarily apply to any other exchanges between the former congressman and others.

The news come on the heels that Edmund has hired former Timothy McVeigh attorney, Stephen Jones.

Developing...
'

http://www.drudgereport.com/page.htm

BTW · « **Reply #126 on:** October 05, 2006, 07:24:32 PM »

There's a phrase in chess, "check and mate."

The Democrats have lived off of "October surprise."
Now it may have bitten them badly. This story ain't over but I suspect the Democrats are starting to wish it never happened. An investigation cuts both ways, and I'm wondering how enthusiastic the Democrats are going to be about this investigation after the weekend. You know you actually had Democrats saying this week, that homosexuals should not be included in supervising pages.

Yes its gonna get real interesting:D

Why does the page have someone known as a defense lawyer??

The Democratic party could not survive this type of "mistake."

Chairboy · « **Reply #127 on:** October 05, 2006, 07:31:18 PM »

BTW, if this turns out to be a red herring (your breathless expose about this being a prank), can we expect any sort of response or mea culpa from you? Or will you just sort of... I dunno, fade from the subject?

BTW · « **Reply #128 on:** October 05, 2006, 07:33:24 PM »

I'll be here all weekend, Chairboy. Will you also?

BTW · « **Reply #129 on:** October 05, 2006, 07:44:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Chairboy
BTW, if this turns out to be a red herring (your breathless expose about this being a prank), can we expect any sort of response or mea culpa from you? Or will you just sort of... I dunno, fade from the subject?

As I said, Chairboy, I'll be on all weekend. Wanna have a pool as to how long it will take ABC to mention Drudge's report on this? I'm guessing Sunday AFTER the news shows. But I'll tell you this. ABC knows about the report right now.

Chairboy · « **Reply #130 on:** October 05, 2006, 07:47:06 PM »

I'm sure it'l get mentioned somewhere, I'm talking about whether or not it grows legs. I'm really puzzled about why Foley resigned, apologized, and described how alcoholism and being molested as a child are all components of him being the victim of a prank.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #131 on:** October 05, 2006, 07:53:41 PM »

Could you be goaded into sending inappropriate e-mails and IM's to underage pages?

Even if Foley was goaded, it is still inapproriate behavior, and resignation would follow.

BTW · « **Reply #132 on:** October 05, 2006, 07:56:55 PM »

This from http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Amid_questions_ABC_says_messages_couldnt_1005.html

---

Nobody at ABC would specifically deny the Drudge contention about the now-infamous instant message conversation

---

It goes on to say that ABC plans to introduce other conversations with pages.
I don't know where this going to go either. I don't know if ABC is in CYA mode or not. But I'll tell you it is NOT what it was first presented as, a Congressman sexually harassing a 16 year old boy. That's what its not. So right now the whole story just stinks and it should be investigated fully. The emails we all saw were not with a minor. That was a lie. So now we have to see how far the lies go. Now we have to see who put out the lie. The IM's were with an 18 year old page, not a 16 year old page. There's a legal difference of course.

Toad · « **Reply #133 on:** October 05, 2006, 07:59:43 PM »

Holden... u saxy thang! Whoo-hoo!

Nope, Foley has to be fully investigated. If there are criminal activities, he should be punished to the full extent of the law.

BTW · « **Reply #134 on:** October 05, 2006, 07:59:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Could you be goaded into sending inappropriate e-mails and IM's to underage pages?

Even if Foley was goaded, it is still inapproriate behavior, and resignation would follow.

Important point- those IM published were with an *18-year-old * page not an under aged page. Ethically there is no difference but legally its a huge difference. And this whole "pedophile" smear now seems as nothing but an assassination.