• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Another "Scandal" Debunked (1 Viewer)

aquapub

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
344
Location
America (A.K.A., a red state)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
From BS allegations of cocaine use, to forgeries about National Guard service, to trumped up fundraising charges, Republicans are more than familiar with the surfacing of last minute "scandals" right before major elections.

The accusations are always proven to be crap, but it always comes out after the damage is done, and their vindication always happens on the back pages of the papers, so everyone is left with a false recelection of the facts.

Now that Election 2006 is over, the House Ethics Comittee has cleared Republicans of any wrong doing in the Mark Foley scandal. Republicans were relentlessly portrayed as having inadequately responded to Foley's misconduct...even though there wasn't one single shred of evidence suggesting that any Republican leader had seen anything like the kind of explicit emails Foley got in trouble over...

...And listening to Democrats go on about the Hastert "scandal" after they gave Gerry Studds (D) a standing ovation and a promotion when he was caught having sex with a teenage boy was a bit much to swallow...

But where's the accountability for all the false charges the media unquestioningly regurgitates (and always against Republicans)?

And look how the media reports Republicans being vindicated:

"Ethics panel finds House GOP leaders negligent"
Ethics panbel finds GOP leaders negligent - Politics - MSNBC.com

Only when you get into the fine print do you see that this was a vindication.
 
Umm... maybe the headline was "Ethics panel finds House GOP leaders negligent" because the panel actually did find House GOP leaders negligent?

Just a thought, y'know. Apparently, if it's not against the law, it's good enough for me, says the GOP. Negligence & placing Congressional pages in danger? Eh, not against the law, they got nothing on us!

You know something's wrong in a party when its "vindication" is being found negligent - but in compliance with the law at least!
 
The accusations are always proven to be crap, but it always comes out after the damage is done, and their vindication always happens on the back pages of the papers, so everyone is left with a false recelection of the facts.

Except that in this case, per your own article, the allegations of negligence and poor oversight were proven to be true...

Now that Election 2006 is over, the House Ethics Comittee has cleared Republicans of any wrong doing in the Mark Foley scandal. Republicans were relentlessly portrayed as having inadequately responded to Foley's misconduct...even though there wasn't one single shred of evidence suggesting that any Republican leader had seen anything like the kind of explicit emails Foley got in trouble over...

Then I suppose your comprehension ability failed you when you got to this line of the article...

Your own source said:
On balance, investigators said evidence supports the conclusion that Hastert's top aide had been told about Foley's conduct in late 2002 or early 2003.

But where's the accountability for all the false charges the media unquestioningly regurgitates (and always against Republicans)?

What false charges?

And look how the media reports Republicans being vindicated:

"Ethics panel finds House GOP leaders negligent"
Ethics panbel finds GOP leaders negligent - Politics - MSNBC.com

Only when you get into the fine print do you see that this was a vindication.

No fine print in any of this article. In fact, its in the headline what was found:

Again from your own source said:
Ethics panel finds House GOP leaders negligent
But Republicans weren’t found to have broken rules in Foley-page scandal

So what were you saying?
 
This has to be one of the finest pieces of partisan :spin: I have ever seen, aquapub. Not only did you cite no sources for where you stand, but the one source you cite, completely refutes your own position. Vindication because they were found negligent...that's a good one. :roll:
 
Umm... maybe the headline was "Ethics panel finds House GOP leaders negligent" because the panel actually did find House GOP leaders negligent?

Negligent how? What should they be doing prohibiting gay congressmen from sending emails to pages? The Dems have no problems with their own actually engaging in sex with pages and interns so what is the requriement you are demanding of Reps?


Just a thought, y'know. Apparently, if it's not against the law, it's good enough for me, says the GOP.

What should be against the law gays sending emails?

Negligence & placing Congressional pages in danger? Eh, not against the law, they got nothing on us!

Well if you believe gay congressmen sending pages emails then lets make it against the law.

You know something's wrong in a party when its "vindication" is being found negligent - but in compliance with the law at least!

What law and what rules to you want put in place then?
 
Negligent how? What should they be doing prohibiting gay congressmen from sending emails to pages?

Hmmm... well, here's a start:

The House ethics committee concluded yesterday that House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and his top staff probably knew for months, if not years, of then-Rep. Mark Foley's inappropriate contact with former House pages but did nothing to protect the teenagers.

Step One: If you know of a congressman's inappropriate contact with teenage pages, you should probably try to stop it.

Top GOP House leaders also "failed to exercise appropriate diligence" in the matter, the committee's report found, and tried "to remain willfully ignorant of the potential consequences of Foley's conduct."...The report speculated that some officials were reluctant to act too aggressively for fear of exposing Foley's homosexuality or for political reasons.

Step Two: Don't try to remain ignorant while teenagers are being taken advantage of by a congressman. Believe it or not, GOP, the safety of teenagers is a little more important than those "political reasons" you used to ignore this entire situation.

The report also chides House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) for not showing sufficient curiosity in the matter, and retiring Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) is criticized for failing to divulge Foley's actions, both years before they were exposed and after they came to light.

Step Three: If you know about the congressman's actions, you probably should inform someone and ensure that the matter is followed up on, especially when it involves underage pages in a sexual manner.

SOURCE: Committee Says GOP Left Foley Unchecked - washingtonpost.com

Good enough for you, Stinger?
 
Step One: If you know of a congressman's inappropriate contact with teenage pages, you should probably try to stop it.

And the inappropreate emails were inappropriate how? And what should have been done above what was done?

But let's be clear here it was DEMOCRATS who had the evidence of his sexual tainted messages. They had them as far back as Nov of 2005. You just said, and I quote "If you know of a congressman's inappropriate contact with teenage pages, you should probably try to stop it." So what should happen to those Democrats?


Step Two: Don't try to remain ignorant while teenagers are being taken advantage of by a congressman.

So what should happen to those Democrats?


Believe it or not, GOP, the safety of teenagers is a little more important than those "political reasons" you used to ignore this entire situation.

So what should happen to those Democrats?


Step Three: If you know about the congressman's actions, you probably should inform someone and ensure that the matter is followed up on, especially when it involves underage pages in a sexual manner.

So what should happen to those Democrats?


Good enough for you, Stinger?

Good enough for what? When it was learned Foley was contacting pages with sexually oriented instant messages he was kicked out. Before then what was it he was suppose to have been doing that the Rep knew about? Read the report it was the DEMOCRATS who knew about them. So what should happen to those Democrats?
 
Let's get this straight, anyone who knew about this should definitely have to take responsibility. But your partisanship baffles me. It seems like you quote without reading what you're quoting. Let's try this again:

Stinger said:
Read the report it was the DEMOCRATS who knew about them.

Really? Try READING this this time, eh?

Article I Quoted Earlier said:
House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and his top staff probably knew for months, if not years, of then-Rep. Mark Foley's inappropriate contact with former House pages but did nothing to protect the teenagers...
Top GOP House leaders also "failed to exercise appropriate diligence" in the matter...
House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) for not showing sufficient curiosity in the matter, and retiring Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) is criticized for failing to divulge Foley's actions.

I count all Republicans, don't you? Show me a source that says that Democrats knew about this and were in a position to stop it (say... in charge of Congress), but still didn't. I just showed you that the GOP did that.

So what should happen to those Republicans?
 
Let's get this straight, anyone who knew about this should definitely have to take responsibility. But your partisanship baffles me. It seems like you quote without reading what you're quoting. Let's try this again:

OK the only people who knew about the sexually orientated instant messages were the DEMOCRATs. What do you propose we do with them?


I count all Republicans, don't you?

And those were NOT sexually oriented instant messages, they were innoucous emails.

Show me a source that says that Democrats knew about this

It's been reported for months and the committee report identifies Matt Miller who worked for the Democrat Congressional Campaign Committee as the person who was shopping them around to the press. Haven't you read the news about this at all?

So what should happen to any Democrats or MSM people who knew about them but did not act?
 
Show me a source that proves that Democrats and ONLY Democrats knew about the sexually explicit IMs. This is the second time I've requested a source by the way.

And those were NOT sexually oriented instant messages, they were innoucous emails.

*Sigh* Let's try this AGAIN:

You know what this is from by now said:
Top GOP House leaders also "failed to exercise appropriate diligence" in the matter, the committee's report found, and tried "to remain willfully ignorant of the potential consequences of Foley's conduct."...The report speculated that some officials were reluctant to act too aggressively for fear of exposing Foley's homosexuality or for political reasons...
House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and his top staff probably knew for months, if not years, of then-Rep. Mark Foley's inappropriate contact with former House pages but did nothing to protect the teenagers...
House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) for not showing sufficient curiosity in the matter, and retiring Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) is criticized for failing to divulge Foley's actions.

It's as clear as day - the GOP leaders KNEW what Foley was doing to the FULL extent of what he was doing, but wanted to save the election so they didn't act on it.

I'm still waiting for that holy source that condemns the Democrats.

Hey, Stinger, now that I've shown proof of the GOP's actions, what should happen to Hastert, Boehner, and other top GOP officials in the House?
 
Show me a source that proves that Democrats and ONLY Democrats knew about the sexually explicit IMs. This is the second time I've requested a source by the way.

Oh now you're trying to qualify it, well no one said that ONLY Democrats knew although they seem to have learned first and whether one side was the only side that knew had nothing to do with what you said. Democrats are just as capable and just as obligated to "do something about it" as Republicans. They did and apparently didn't think it was something that required anything other than he being spoken to about it which he was.

It's as clear as day - the GOP leaders KNEW what Foley was doing to the FULL extent of what he was doing,

Not the instant messages, and the Dems knew a year before what Foley was doing so why did they not speak up until the election?

I'm still waiting for that holy source that condemns the Democrats.

It's been given, I don't like having to repeat myself especially concerning things which are being widely reported and are part of a public document.


"Democratic Leadership Knew About Foley E-mails

December 08, 2006 5:51 PM
Rhonda Schwartz Reports:
The House Ethics Committee Report includes new information that top Democrats were also aware in 2005 of Mark Foley's inappropriate e-mails to congressional pages at about the same time as outgoing Speaker Dennis Hastert's office was informed.
While the report is critical of Hastert and his staff for not taking sufficient action, nowhere is there any evidence that the Democrats followed up.
According to the Committee's report, "the communications directors for both the House Democratic Caucus and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee" in the fall of 2005 also had copies of e-mails written by Mark Foley to a congressional page, which the high school student described as "sick, sick, sick, sick.""



The Blotter


Hey, Stinger, now that I've shown proof of the GOP's actions, what should happen to Hastert, Boehner, and other top GOP officials in the House?

The same thing that will happen to the Dems who knew about them, nothing. Now if you want to make a new rule that if a gay congressman sends a nonsexual non-inticing email to a page they shall resign then propose it. What about congressmen who knew a congressman actual had sex with a page and did nothing about it, what should happen to them?
 
So in Stinger world, that Democrats supposedly knew about Foley in 2005 is BAAADDDD, but Republicans who supposedly knew about Foley a decade ago is ignored? Welcome to the twilligt zone...
 
So in Stinger world, that Democrats supposedly knew about Foley in 2005 is BAAADDDD, but Republicans who supposedly knew about Foley a decade ago is ignored? Welcome to the twilligt zone...

The Democrats and the left have said ANYONE who knew about them and failed to act should be punished. Not me, Dems and the left said that (actually I said it concerning Republicans when the story first broke an d still hold to that). THEN it became apparent that some high level Dems knew about them, probably before but not for certain before any Reps, so that begs the question, if you are going to try an punish Reps why excuse the Dems. Especially those that tried to shop this issue for political gain.

I have been very clear, that if any Rep knew about any seuxally explicit emails sent to an under age page and they did nothing then they have consequences to face. Do you hold the same for Democrats?

And please explain what rule or ethics violation they should be punished for. Remembering that Dems knew for certain that one of theirs was actually engaged in a sexually relationship with an under aged page and did nothing about it and in fact re-elected him and then gave him a high level position. And if you ignore this it will be poised again to you.
 
How about this little tibit Skip?

Monday, Dec. 11, 2006 10:21 a.m. EST

Rahm Emanuel Link to Foley E-mails


A new report raises questions about Rahm Emanuel’s assertion that he and his staff knew nothing about disgraced Rep. Mark Foley’s e-mails to former House pages.

In an October 8 interview with ABC News, the Illinois Democrat said "no – never saw them” when asked if he knew about the e-mails or instant messages between Foley and former pages before news of the messages broke.

Asked if he was "aware” of them, Emanuel repeated, "We never saw them.”

But the new House Ethics Committee report on the scandal, released on December 8, discloses that a senior member of Emanuel’s staff did know about the e-mail and instant messages, according to Holly Bailey’s column in Newsweek.

The report indicates that the e-mails were given to a top Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee staffer in the fall of 2005, more than a year before Foley resigned.

At that time, Emanuel was chairman of the DCCC.....

So if the Dems were so concerned about protecting the kids, which is what they claim, why didn' they take the evidence to the proper authorities and file an ethics complaint with the House which they had all the power in the world to do? If you are going to say that Rep put pages in danger then so did the Dems.
 
The Democrats and the left have said ANYONE who knew about them and failed to act should be punished. Not me, Democrats and the left said that (actually I said it concerning Republicans when the story first broke an d still hold to that). THEN it became apparent that some high level Dems knew about them, probably before but not for certain before any Republicans, so that begs the question, if you are going to try an punish Reps why excuse the Dems. Especially those that tried to shop this issue for political gain.

You have to be pretty stupid, blind and dumb if the republicans did not know about Foley before the Democrats.. I mean someone from the republican side had to tell the democratic side about Foley no? Dont you think Foley showing up "drunk" in front of the pages building and trying to get in, should have sent a few alarm bells off?

Of course the Dems used this as political meat for the campaign.. it was basicly handed to them. A gay republican? A gay republican that might have had sex or talked dirty to male pages under his "protection"? Wow.. need more ammo..... lets see.. A republican run congress playing pass the buck, blame the gays or pages and trying to do damage control? Okay need a bit more.... How about a gay repbulican in charge of the "fight the pedofiles" campaign .... oh never mind.. lets just stick with A GAY REPUBLICAN.. the gays, the arch enemy of one of the main backers of the republican party.

I mean you could not have scripted a hollywood movie better, and you expect the Demcorats NOT to run with it during an election cycle in a very partisan atmosphere?

I have been very clear, that if any Rep knew about any seuxally explicit emails sent to an under age page and they did nothing then they have consequences to face. Do you hold the same for Democrats?

Yes I do, however the so called investigation was basicly a whitewash.. sure the Republican leadership got a small smack over the wrist, but that was expected and they are after all out of a job now. Did you see the press confrence? Both sides were basicly playing blocking game for the other side and patting each other on the back, not really answering any questions.

And please explain what rule or ethics violation they should be punished for. Remembering that Dems knew for certain that one of theirs was actually engaged in a sexually relationship with an under aged page and did nothing about it and in fact re-elected him and then gave him a high level position. And if you ignore this it will be poised again to you.

Are you talking about Stubbs? What about Crane then? Point should be that congress DID something about it when they found out about it. This congress and especially the leadership played pass the hot potato and blame the gays and pages game and avoid all responsibility.

Should Stubbs and Crane have been kicked out of Congress back then..... well yes and no. No for having sex with so called minors (bullshit age range in the US btw), but yes for having sex with young people who are basicly either under thier protection or/and employment.

Its sad how many keep forgetting Crane, who had sex with a woman, while everyone remembers Stubbs because he was gay and did it with a guy.
 
You have to be pretty stupid, blind and dumb if the republicans did not know about Foley before the Democrats..

That's a totally baseless assertion. The Democrats most probably had the emails BEFORE the Republicans did.
I mean someone from the republican side had to tell the democratic side about Foley no?

No.

Dont you think Foley showing up "drunk" in front of the pages building and trying to get in, should have sent a few alarm bells off?

On it's face no but what should have been done other than what was done? He was warned to stay away. Other than that he is an elected official and until he did something to broke the law or the ethics rules what was to be done?

Of course the Democrats used this as political meat for the campaign..

Showing they were more concerned with their own poltical gain than the safety of the pages, as they have put it.

A gay republican? A gay republican that might have had sex or talked dirty to male pages under his "protection"?

What was the evidence before the instant messages that he had had sex with anyone under age or talked dirty to them? None.

Wow.. need more ammo..... lets see..

The Democrats has the same "ammo" apparently they, who had a vested interest in ruining the man did not see much in it did they? Or did they allow it to go on in order to gain the biggest poltical advantage out of it?

A republican run congress playing pass the buck, blame the gays or pages and trying to do damage control?

Since there is no evidence that any of that occoured. But if you are going to lay that on them then you also have to condem the Dems for doing the same, leaving it lay for poltical reasons.

Okay need a bit more.... How about a gay repbulican in charge of the "fight the pedofiles" campaign .... oh never mind.. lets just stick with A GAY REPUBLICAN.. the gays, the arch enemy of one of the main backers of the republican party.

OK what about it?

I mean you could not have scripted a hollywood movie better, and you expect the Demcorats NOT to run with it during an election cycle in a very partisan atmosphere?

I would have expected them to run with it when they found out about it else they are no better than the Republicans as you have condemed them.

Yes I do, however the so called investigation was basicly a whitewash..

Another baseless assertion.

Did you see the press confrence? Both sides were basicly playing blocking game for the other side and patting each other on the back, not really answering any questions.

Yes I did, and what they said was what we all already knew. When the sexually explict instant messages were brought forward the Rep cut Foley loose. Alot more than what Democrats do to their sexual deviants.


Are you talking about Stubbs? What about Crane then? Point should be that congress DID something about it when they found out about it.

Republicans wanted them both out, the Dems stood in the way. Republicans got rid of Crane, Democrats celebrated Studds. So spare me the faux indignation over the Republicans until you hold Democrats equally accountable.

This congress and especially the leadership played pass the hot potato and blame the gays and pages game and avoid all responsibility.

More baseless assertions.
Should Stubbs and Crane have been kicked out of Congress back then..... well yes and no.

Yes, the Dems wouldn't have it. Newt Gingrich led the charge to have them kicked out but the Dems were in the majority and prevailed. Were Foley a Democrat I have no doubt he would still be in office.

Its sad how many keep forgetting Crane, who had sex with a woman, while everyone remembers Stubbs because he was gay and did it with a guy.

It's a shame you have to make things up to try and keep your point. Go read the previous threads, I have never defend Crane as the Dems defended Studds.

And it is NOTED that you dodged the fact that Rom Emmanual has been caught in an outright LIE about it. He DID know about it and lied to the public. Should he be kicked out of the congress for lieing to the American people about it?
 
Stinger.....do you ever tire of trying to rationalize what seems obvious to everyone else?
 
That's a totally baseless assertion. The Democrats most probably had the emails BEFORE the Republicans did.

THAT'S a totally baseless assertion.
 
Apparently, if it's not against the law, it's good enough for me, says the GOP.

"Says the GOP"? Isn't that the mantra of Clinton supporters? Speaking of :spin:
 
"Says the GOP"? Isn't that the mantra of Clinton supporters? Speaking of :spin:

...OK? I've had :spin: so many times in my life over my support of Clinton... ?:confused:
 
That's a totally baseless assertion. The Democrats most probably had the emails BEFORE the Republicans did.

And you have proof that Democrats knew about the emails before the house leadership? That the democrats "sat" on this information for a year? You have proof that republicans working with Foley did not know he was gay nore he liked small boys?


So getting these emails and learning his identity, and all the other rumor and facts of the case going back deacdes.. all come from Democrats? Does that mean you admit that the republicans are stupid, blind and dumb? That the Democrats are the ones that have to police the Republican party for pedofiles and corrupt politicans?

On it's face no but what should have been done other than what was done? He was warned to stay away. Other than that he is an elected official and until he did something to broke the law or the ethics rules what was to be done?

Ohhh he was warned! Yea that would show him.. big punishment!.. and then put him on the committe to protect children.. yea good idea! They protected thier own, well knowing what he was and fearing the worst but not doing a damn thing about it. After all, a gay republican.. the horror!

Showing they were more concerned with their own poltical gain than the safety of the pages, as they have put it.

And the house leadership showed what when they were passing the hot potato and doing the blame game? Leadership? Balls? or political survival? Lets see, Hastert blamed his staff, then the Democrats, then the victims, and I think Clinton got a swipe to at some point, not to mention some in his own party who were running away from him like he was the walking dead.

What was the evidence before the instant messages that he had had sex with anyone under age or talked dirty to them? None.

Unless he filmed the sex, then its usually ones word against another... unless it was a group thing.

And it does not matter, what he did talking dirty to so called underaged young people is bad, doing it as a political leader is worse, doing it as a political leader that is suppose to protecting them is unforgivable and on top of that he was the guy running the committe to fight the very filth he was accused off!

And you are focusing so much on what finally brought him down.. what about all the other years before that? All the stuff we DONT know anything about? Or are you in the belief this was his "first time"?

The Democrats has the same "ammo" apparently they, who had a vested interest in ruining the man did not see much in it did they? Or did they allow it to go on in order to gain the biggest poltical advantage out of it?

And if a democrat was busted taking bribes from union or organised crime, would the republicans not run with it? No wait, they could not even defeat a guy with 90k in his freezer, nore a man who was empeached by Congress for taking bribes.. but damn they are milking the fact that the Democrats have such 2 people among thier ranks..

As for runing the man.. he did that all on his own. In fact the Democrats did not have to do much, to gain huge political advantage from it, thanks to the idiotic way the house leadership ran the show, and thanks to the corrupt politicians within the GOP. After Delay, Frist, Cunningham, Abramoff and all the other scandal, Foley was just the icing on the cake. The Democrats did not have to lift a finger.. at most they had to debunk the GOP propoganda and damage control.

Since there is no evidence that any of that occoured. But if you are going to lay that on them then you also have to condem the Democrats for doing the same, leaving it lay for poltical reasons.

Did not occur? For **** sake did you not see the news? Hasert was blaming everyone from his aides, George Soros to gays over to the pages themselvs.

OK what about it?

What about it? Come on, you cant be that dumb. When a political figure falls because of a thing he or/and his political party campaigns against, then it shows how hypocritical he and his party are. How can he or his party go all out gay bashing, which they do with the full support of thier backers on the religious right, and yet have gays among them, let alone pedofile gays?

I would have expected them to run with it when they found out about it else they are no better than the Republicans as you have condemed them.

At least the Dems run with fact, and not like the republicans with fiction. Yes that was a baseless assertion!.... almost.

Another baseless assertion.

Oh, then what did the report exactly find out? That the leadership droped the ball.. err yea!!!.. but did it find out if the leadership knew about years ago? If the republican party knowingly backed a peadofile for reelection? nope not to my knowledge.. but correct me if I am wrong.

But knowing politicians, getting to the truth in this case would hurt both parties and hence the truth would say buried. I have seen it before.. in Europe it was ripe after WW2, political enemies branding together to protect the big fish, while the small fish were fried.

Yes I did, and what they said was what we all already knew. When the sexually explict instant messages were brought forward the Rep cut Foley loose. Alot more than what Democrats do to their sexual deviants.

Oh? The Dems punished thier so called sexual deviants.. thats more than the republicans did... they are doing the "he is not a member of congress" rutine to this day! and yet he recieves a nice fat pension from congress.

Republicans wanted them both out, the Dems stood in the way. Republicans got rid of Crane, Democrats celebrated Studds. So spare me the faux indignation over the Republicans until you hold Democrats equally accountable.

Oh yea the republicans did a great job of getting rid of him. It took 2 years! And he even won the GOP primary in 1984! Great job in "kicking him out".. leaving him in office for 2 years under the GOP banner, letting him win his GOP primary... in the end it took the electorate of his constituancy to "kick him out"

More baseless assertions.

So you were living in a cave with no access to news media during the scandal? Hell there was even a push to paint Foley as a Democrat during the whole mess!

Yes, the Dems wouldn't have it. Newt Gingrich led the charge to have them kicked out but the Dems were in the majority and prevailed. Were Foley a Democrat I have no doubt he would still be in office.

Considering how warped some of Americas poltics is, nothing would supprise me. Electing corrupt judges, or men under investigation, self confesed drunks, men that beat women and even the dead.. nothing supprises me.

It's a shame you have to make things up to try and keep your point. Go read the previous threads, I have never defend Crane as the Dems defended Studds.

You barely mention him! Its always Stubbs, and very little mention of Crane. And why is that? When the Foley scandal was at its highest, most US news media mentioned the Stubbs scandal, but barely mention Crane.. was it because Stubbs was GAY?

And it is NOTED that you dodged the fact that Rom Emmanual has been caught in an outright LIE about it. He DID know about it and lied to the public. Should he be kicked out of the congress for lieing to the American people about it?

What are you talking about?
 
The anatomy of a coverup.

These were kids.

Think Progress » The Foley Coverup Timeline


2000 — Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-AZ) informed of improper Foley Internet messages that made a page feel uncomfortable with the direction Foley was taking their email relationship. Kolbe claims he never personally confronted Foley, but rather recommended that the complaint be passed along to his office. [Washington Post, 10/9/06; Arizona Republic, 10/11/06]

2001 — A Republican staff member warns pages “to watch out for Congressman Mark Foley.” A former page says that they were told “don’t get too wrapped up in him being too nice to you and all that kind of stuff.” [ABC, 10/1/06]

2003 — Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) has sexually explicit IM exchanges with an underage boy who worked as a Congressional page. [ABC News, 9/29/06]

2003 — Foley’s former aide Kirk Fordham told The Associated Press that “when he learned about Foley’s inappropriate behavior toward pages, he had ‘more than one conversation with senior staff at the highest level of the House of Representatives asking them to intervene,’ alluding to House Speaker Dennis Hastert. Hastert’s office denied the explosive allegations.” [CBS News, 10/5/06]

APRIL 2003 — Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) interrupts a House vote on the 2003 Iraq supplemental to “engage in Internet sex with a high school student who had served as a congressional page.” [ABC, 10/3/06]

SUMMER 2005 — Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) sends inappropriate emails to another former Congressional page. [CREW]

SEPTEMBER 2005 — Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-LA), who sponsored the page, learns “of the e-mails from a reporter.” [AP, 9/29/06; CQ, 9/30/06]

FALL 2005 — “Tim Kennedy, a staff assistant in the [Speaker J. Denis Hastert’s] Office, received a telephone call from Congressman Rodney Alexander’s Chief of Staff who indicated that he had an email exchange between Congressman Foley and a former House page…[Mike] Stokke [Deputy Chief of Staff for Speaker Hastert] called the Clerk and asked him to come to the Speaker’s Office so that he could put him together with Congressman Alexander’s Chief of Staff.” [Hastert Statement, 9/30/06]

LATE 2005 — Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL), Chairman of the House Page Board, “was notified by the then Clerk of the House, who manages the Page Program, that he had been told by Congressman Rodney Alexander (R-LA) about an email exchange between Congressman Foley and a former House Page.” Shimkus interviewed Foley and told him “to cease all contact with this former house page.” He did not inform Rep. Dale Kildee (D-MI), the only Democrat on the House page Board. [Roll Call, 9/29/06]

EARLY 2006 — Rep. Tom Reynolds (R-NY) talks Foley into running for another term. Bob Novak reported, “A member of the House leadership told me that Foley, under continuous political pressure because of his sexual orientation, was considering not seeking a seventh term this year but that Rep. Tom Reynolds, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), talked him into running.” [New York Post, 10/4/06]

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006 — Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.), whose office first received the complaint from the page, told Boehner about Foley’s inappropriate e-mails, and Boehner sent him to Tom Reynolds. Alexander tells Reynolds about “the existence of e-mails between Mark Foley and a former page of Mr. Alexander’s.” Reynolds tells Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) about the emails and his conversation with Alexander. [Reynolds Statement, 9/30/06; Roll Call, 9/30/06; Hastert Statement, 9/30/06; Chicago Tribune, 10/3/06]

SPRING 2006 — House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) learns of “inappropriate ‘contact’ between Foley and a 16-year-old page” from Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-LA). After learning about Foley’s conduct, Boehner told Speaker of the House J. Denis Hastert who assured Boehner he would “take care of it.” Later, Boehner changed his story and told the Washington Post he didn’t remember whether he talked to Hastert. [Washington Post, 9/30/06; New York Times, 10/1/06]

SPRING 2006 — Reynolds says he told Hastert about the e-mails after he learned about them. “He said he alerted the Republican speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, to the issue, but Mr. Hastert said he had no recollection of the contact.” [The Sun, 10/3/06]

MAY 10, 2006 — Reynold’s personal PAC, TOMPAC, donates $5,000 to Foley’s campaign. [New York Daily News, 9/30/06]

JULY 21, 2006 — Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington forwarded the messages to the Federal Bureau of Investigation on July 21 and requested an investigation. [CREW, 10/5/06]

JULY 27, 2006 — Foley writes a $100,000 check to the NRCC, chaired by Reynolds. [New York Daily News, 9/30/06]

JULY 27, 2006 — Foley, still co-chairman of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children’s Caucus, attends a signing ceremony at the White House for the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. [White House, 9/27/06; Talkingpointsmemo, 9/30/06; Washington Post, 10/1/06]

AUGUST 7, 2006 — The NRCC accepted a $100,000 contribution from Foley’s campaign committee. [FEC]

SEPTEMBER 28, 2006 — ABC publishes emails between Foley and former page. [ABC, 9/28/06]

SEPTEMBER 29, 2006 3:00 PM — Foley resigns. [ABC, 9/29/06]

SEPTEMBER 29, 2006 6:00 PM — ABC publishes sexually explict Instant Messages between Foley and several former pages. [ABC, 9/29/06]

SEPTEMBER 29, 2006 — “Aides to the speaker [Hastert] say he was not aware until last week of inappropriate behavior by Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., who resigned on Friday after portions of racy e-mail exchanges between him and current and former underage congressional pages became public.” [Chicago Tribune, 9/30/06]

SEPTEMBER 30, 2006 — Hastert admits he was told about the emails by Reynolds in the spring. [Hastert Statement, 9/30/06]

OCTOBER 1, 2006 — FBI opens “preliminary investigation” of Foley. “Officials say the FBI and Department of Justice lawyers are trying to determine how many such e-mails were sent, how many different computers were used and whether any of the teenage victims will cooperate in the investigation.” [ABC, 10/1/06]

OCTOBER 1, 2006 — Hastert urges Gov. Jeb Bush to initiate an investigation. “As Speaker of the House, I hereby request that you direct the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to conduct an investigation of Mr. Foley’s conduct with current and former House pages to determine to what extent any of his actions violated Florida law.” [Hastert letter, 10/1/06]

OCTOBER 4, 2006 — Former Foley aide and Reynolds’ chief of staff Kirk Fordham is fired. “People familiar with Fordham’s side of the story…said Fordham was being used as a scapegoat by Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert. They said Fordham had repeatedly warned Hastert’s staff about Foley’s ‘problem’ with pages, but little was done.” [ABC, 10/4/06]

OCTOBER 4, 2006 — House Majority Whip Roy Blunt (R-MO) criticizes Hastert’s mishandling of Foley scandal, saying that “he would have handled [the Foley scandal] differently if he’d known about it.” “I think I could have given some good advice here, which is you have to be curious, you have to ask all the questions you can think of,” Blunt said. “You absolutely can’t decide not to look into activities because one individual’s parents don’t want you to.” [AP, 10/4/06]

OCTOBER 4, 2006 — Right-wing blogger Wild Bill outs a former congressional page. Roger L. Simon of Pajamas Media and Glenn Reynolds of Instapundit link to the post. [ThinkProgress, 10/5/06]

OCTOBER 5, 2006 — The Hill reports that the source who gave Foley’s emails to news media says the documents came from a congressional aide “who has been a registered Republican since becoming eligible to vote.” [The Hill, 10/5/06]

OCTOBER 8, 2006 — Former page says he and Foley engaged in sex. The LAT reports, “A former House page says he had sex with then-Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.).” The ex-page said his correspondence with Foley began after he finished the page program for high school juniors, but the sexual encounter occurred when he was 21 years old. “The former page’s exchanges with Foley offer a glimpse of possible predatory behavior by the congressman as he assessed male teenagers assigned as House errand-runners.” [LA Times, 10/8/06]

OCTOBER 9, 2006 — “Moving with unusual speed,” the House Ethics Committee start interviews in its probe of the Mark Foley scandal. Longtime Foley aide and former Reynolds chief of staff and Foley aide Kirk Fordham will be testifying. [WSJ, 10/9/06]
 
Stinger.....do you ever tire of trying to rationalize what seems obvious to everyone else?

tecoyah....if you want to rebut something I stated then do so. What is obvious which everyone else around seems to want to ignore is that the Dems had the same informatin, probably before the Rep, and did nothing about it. Held on to it to get what they hoped would be the maximum poltical damage against Rep. They politized it. They even lied about it. So if there are any complaints to be levied against anyone vis-a-vis Foley it's the Dems.
 
Umm... maybe the headline was "Ethics panel finds House GOP leaders negligent" because the panel actually did find House GOP leaders negligent?

Just a thought, y'know. Apparently, if it's not against the law, it's good enough for me, says the GOP. Negligence & placing Congressional pages in danger? Eh, not against the law, they got nothing on us!

You know something's wrong in a party when its "vindication" is being found negligent - but in compliance with the law at least!

Negligent, based on not one shred of evidence Hastert knew anything about the kind of dirty emails Foley was sending.

Yes, this panel can characterize Republicans as negligent all it wants, but all the FACTS it produced, vindicated Republicans.

The fact that the media headlined the least substantive part, the baseless "negligence" part, is a fine example of why we should not allow our media to be run by former liberal operatives.

Besides, the allegation was that Republicans had been covering up Foley's misconduct leading up to the scandal. The central complaint of the pro-pedophile party was debunked by this report.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom