Did Democrats Page Mark Foley?

[Naturalized-Texan]

Did Democrats Page Mark Foley? (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ibd/20061002/bs_ibd_ibd/2006102issues01)

Scandal: Right after Mark Foley was revealed to have had inappropriate e-mail conversations with a 16-year-old page, he resigned and checked into rehab. Now, what did Democrats know, and when did they know it?

Yes, you read that right: the Democrats.

..................

If anything, the episode reveals the Democrats' hypocrisy about their own behavior. The fact that Foley resigned virtually within minutes of being told that ABC News had copies of his salacious e-mails and text messages indicates he at least felt shame for his actions. Can the same be said for Democrats?

Sadly, it doesn't seem so. How else can you explain the following?

In 1983, then-Democratic Rep. Gerry Studds of Massachusetts was caught in a similar situation. In his case, Studds had sex with a male teenage page -- something Foley hasn't been charged with.

Did Studds express contrition? Resign? Quite the contrary. He rejected Congress' censure of him and continued to represent his district until his retirement in 1996.

................

...if this scandal is the Democrats' answer to their problems at the polls, it's pretty pathetic. It shows a base contempt for the voters.

{More at the link above.}

[Lubbock]

I just wonder if there is a single Republican inside the Beltway with the intestinal fortitude to stand up to the Dems and point out their hypocracy?

My guess is . . . NO.

The Republicans will get rolled on this unles someone can get the time line together and prove that the Dems had this bombshell and sat on it until time to pull the trigger in an effort to throw the upcoming election.

I have been so angry over this thing that my hair is nearly on fire.

In listening to commentary and opinion on this today, I heard one woman [I think she was a Dem shill] opine that women seemed to be having a very diferent reaction to the e-mails [which is where it started] than men, and for what it's worth, I have to agree with her.

The male opinions have been entirely different to the e-mails than mine. I've only read the e-mail --not the IM's --what's reported is way too raw for me already without actually reading them. The e-mails were a harbinger of worse to come, and someone should have taken them seriously.

If Foley had been taken to task on the e-mails, and even drummed out of the House if necessary, it would never have gotten to the IMs --at least not with Foley able to bring down the Republicans --which I think there is a very good chance of.


I don't hold Hastert blameless, but the real culprit [other than Foley] is the Dems. They have known about this for just as long as the Republicans, and they sat on it, held it, until the time to release it was ripe for doing the most damage.

And one more thing: Foley ought to just commit suicide. He could do the world a favor by putting a gun to his head and pulling the trigger. One less pedophile.

[DoctorDoom]

The whole thing reeks of RAT setup. The bastards are obsessed with regaining power. There is nothing so low and contemptible that they will not do it to draw attention away from their worthlessness and their treason.

Hopefully it will come back to chew their asses into RATburger, and will be another giant step to the self-destruction of the RAT party.

[Rhino]

Even if the Republicans call them on it, the media won't report it, not widely anyway.

[DoctorDoom]

Question: has anyone who uses IM programs found a simple way to save the running conversations for later reference? Would a kid involved in an IM exchange have the smarts, let alone the presence of mind, to save it? The few times that I've used MSN Messenger, the text scrolls up off the screen and goes away. It CAN be saved, but it's not something that a 16YO page involved in a sexual interchange will take the time to do.

And why would the kid even bother saving it, if not for an ulterior purpose?

This requires deep investigation.

[Rhino]

Most of them save automatically. It just isn't real obvious. I know I've recovered several lost AOL IM conversations for people. And the security sites continually caution that the conversations are typically saved on the hard drive. That's one reason why they advise against IM software, besides the fact that they are notorious for vulnerabilities.

[Jester21]

The Republicans will get rolled on this unles someone can get the time line together and prove that the Dems had this bombshell and sat on it until time to pull the trigger in an effort to throw the upcoming election.

I'm eager to see who is behind this as well. It probably was a democrat, knowing the damage it would cause. What I'm unsure of is how long they sat on it for. If they didn't bring it to the light of day immediately, they're no better than anyone who covered for Foley, or at least didn't look closely enough at the situation when it was brought to their attention.

But I have yet to see anything other than speculation indicating that this info was held to be released at its most politically damaging time.

[DoctorDoom]

Most of them save automatically. It just isn't real obvious. I know I've recovered several lost AOL IM conversations for people.That suggests that it's not a kid-level project, which makes it even more suspicious.

[Longhorn_Platinum]

Rhino:
Even if the Republicans call them on it, the media won't report it, not widely anyway.

:unsmile: Maybe not, but it would at least force them to bury the story, lest all the facts come to light.

[Naturalized-Texan]

That suggests that it's not a kid-level project, which makes it even more suspicious.
I wouldn't be at all surprised if some time after Nov. 7 we learn that those IMs were fakes and didn't come from Mark Foley at all. This stinks as much as those forged documents about Bush's National Guard service.

[Lubbock]

"Forged" crossed my mind, too, NT.

When a Democrat is involved, nothing should surprise any of us.

[hdmundt]

Even if the Republicans call them on it, the media won't report it, not widely anyway.

Yep. The story will die faster than the echo of Richard Armitage's voice.

[Wyatt_Junker]

Yep. The story will die faster than the echo of Richard Armitage's voice.

Excellent point. Whatever happened to that?