Foley Quits Amid Allegations of Email Sex Scandal

McGentrix wrote:

Link to Dys' "research"

If one cared to waste a few hours, you could make a pretty impressive list of Democrats as well, quite possibly far longer than the Republican one, so I don't see the point.

Proof again I guess Leftists see issues all political, not moral, which explains why Republicans complaining about Democrats crimes are seen as an attack on that party so they circle the wagons, as opposed to Foley, he quits in disgrace and everybody including Republicans condemn him. Can everybody see the difference? Its plain as day.

Where'd all the "It's Just Sex" Democrats Go?
by J.B. Williams

Tuesday, October 3, 2006

The Seattle Times reports "House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi wants the House Ethics Committee to put Republican leadership under oath to find out what they knew about Congressman Mark Foley's inappropriate communications with Congressional pages."

In a statement, Minority Senate leader Harry Reid (D) described the allegations against Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) as 'repugnant.' "Equally as bad," the Nevada Democrat said, "is the possibility that Republican leaders in the House of Representatives knew there was a problem and ignored it to preserve a Congressional seat this election year."

Now wait a minute...

Then President Bill Clinton had not been sending inappropriate suggestive emails and instant messages to a young intern, an act certainly repugnant no matter the authors' politics. He had reduced the previously revered Oval Office, to just a personal sexually perverted play pen.

Democrats didn't sit silent as the news broke of Clinton's repeated and continuing sexual misconduct, they rushed to his defense with some dreamed up right-wing conspiracy theory intended to misdirect public attention away from Clinton's life-long sex addiction, throwing every person disgusted by his irresponsible conduct under the bus. They were not innocent bystanders, they were actively complicit, even enablers.

As Clinton wagged his finger in the nose of every American, assuring the world that he "did not have sex with that woman", he and his closest advisors knew better. As he sat under oath before a court committing outright perjury before a world-wide audience, Democrats stood firmly at his side, crying foul, insisting that any lie about sex isn't a lie at all really.

Even once Clinton was impeached and disbarred for perjury - Democrats insisted that none of this had anything to do with his ability to hold the highest office in the land. Many of those now seeking to make political hay out of Foley's disgracefully stupid indiscretions once blocked any effort to remove a convicted perjurer from the White House.

Foley certainly screwed up, BIG TIME! But he at least had the decency to resign, a decency neither Clinton himself nor his many Democrat supporters ever demonstrated. Now we are supposed to listen as Democrats try to cash-in on what can only be described as inappropriate sexual activities between consenting adults?

When former New Jersey Governor James McGreevey was busted cheating on his wife and family with a young male office assistant, Democrats again rushed to his side to defend his actions as that of a closet homosexual who did not deserve to be tossed from office on the basis of his sexual misconduct alone.

They kept him in office to avoid the mid-term appointment of a Republican Governor, buying time for the Party to come up with his Democrat replacement. That replacement was Senator John Corzine, who personally bought both his senate seat and the governorship with his own personal wealth.

Democrat Representative Barney Franks didn't get busted sending private messages to his boy friend - he was busted paying a male prostitute for services. He was busted while using his elected position of power to clear his boy friend from his felony past, with convictions for cocaine possession, oral sodomy and "production of obscene items involving a juvenile."

Again, Democrats across the country ran to defend Franks and make excuses for his perverted and irresponsible if not bizarre behaviors.

Yet today, we are to believe that these same Democrats are so upset by private email exchanges, that they must have a full-scale FBI investigation into not just Foley's personal misconduct, but every Republican in congress too?

Give me a BREAK!!! We're talking about Democrats here...

Democrats! - People who don't know the difference between innocent human life and a stomach tumor. People who declare that ALL sexual perversions be given equal status under the law and equal rights under the time-honored name of Marriage. People who have rushed to demand First Amendment protection of pornography, at the same time claiming that the bible has no such protections... Democrats...!

Any Republican who didn't call for Foley's resignation isn't a conservative. But for Democrats to try to capitalize on a republican SEX SCANDAL is hilarious! I mean we're talking about a Party that idolizes JFK and Clinton on the basis of their sexual prowess. A Party still led by gin-soaked Teddy Kennedy. Come on...

Today's Democrats aren't only shameless... They're STUPID!

Believing that they can buy votes with promises from the treasury is one thing. But believing they can capitalize on someone else's sexual misconduct is just plain insane...

Are you kidding me???

Foley should be finished... So should any politician looking to cash-in on Foley's follies, especially if they are a Democrat! Get out a here... I really have seen it all now!

"I deeply regret and accept full responsibility for the harm I have caused," Foley said.

Foley has already begun taking responsibility for his actions. Democrats never have and never will!

Paging Mr. Hastert
Could a gay Congressman be quarantined?

Tuesday, October 3, 2006 12:01 a.m. EDT

Florida Republican Mark Foley's sexually explicit emails to a Congressional page certainly warranted his resignation from the House, and they may well merit prosecution. But this being five weeks from an election, the GOP House leadership is also being assailed for not having come down more strongly on a gay Congressman for showing a more than friendly interest in underage boys. That's a different issue altogether.

At least this seems to be the essence of the Democratic and media charge against Speaker Dennis Hastert, who admits his office was told months ago about a friendly, non-explicit 2005 email exchange between Mr. Foley and another page. In that exchange, Mr. Foley had asked the teenager "how old are you now" and requested "an email pic."

In our admittedly traditional view, this was odd and suspect behavior, especially because Mr. Foley was well known as a homosexual even if he declined to publicly acknowledge it. And Mr. Hastert was informed that fellow Illinois Republican John Shimkus--who oversees the page program as part of a six-member board--spoke privately with Mr. Foley, who explained that the email was innocent.

What next was Mr. Hastert supposed to do with an elected Congressman? Assume that Mr. Foley was a potential sexual predator and bar him from having any private communication with pages? Refer him to the Ethics Committee? In retrospect, barring contact with pages would have been wise.

But in today's politically correct culture, it's easy to understand how senior Republicans might well have decided they had no grounds to doubt Mr. Foley merely because he was gay and a little too friendly in emails. Some of those liberals now shouting the loudest for Mr. Hastert's head are the same voices who tell us that the larger society must be tolerant of private lifestyle choices, and certainly must never leap to conclusions about gay men and young boys. Are these Democratic critics of Mr. Hastert saying that they now have more sympathy for the Boy Scouts' decision to ban gay scoutmasters? Where's Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on that one?





Mr. Foley's explicit emails--which were sent to a former page who had returned home--clearly crossed the line into "vile and repulsive," as Mr. Hastert put it yesterday. And the Floridian has now resigned in disgrace and is being criminally investigated. This is harsher treatment than was meted out in the past to some Members of Congress who crossed another line and actually had sexual relations with underage pages. Democrat Gerry Studds of Massachusetts was censured in 1983 for seducing a male teenage page, but remained in the House for another 13 years and retired, according to the Boston Globe, with a rich pension.
Mr. Foley lied to many people over the years, most notably to himself. It's one of those human mysteries that someone so prominent, and so active as a spokesman against sexual predators, would send emails that he knew would destroy his career if they became public. That kind of psychoanalysis is above our pay grade.

Yes, Mr. Hastert and his staff should have done more to quarantine Mr. Foley from male pages after the first email came to light. But if that's the standard, we should all admit we are returning to a rule of conduct that our cultural elite long ago abandoned as intolerant.

Mark Foley and the New Rules

Media Covered Up Evidence Of Child Abuse Crimes
While the quivering right demands Hastert's resignation (wrongly) the real news is being under reported and missed. And that is that Brian Ross of ABC News now says he knew of the possible crimes against children as far back as August of last year and did nothing.

Brian Ross of ABC News said he learned about the e-mail messages in August but was too busy with Hurricane Katrina and the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks to pursue them immediately.

That excuse is pure BS! First off, he had evidence of possible child abuse and that should have been reported to law enforcement - not held for some story line. And second, what was wrong with dealing with this in October - after those events he sited? What about November? Why not in December? What was so pressing in January? Why did he not do something to stop a predator in February? What was more important than this in March? Couldn't he find the time in April of this year? Surely he had time in May or June? Nothing could be done in July and August? Was it Katrina and 9-11 AGAIN that knocked any chances of stopping a child abuse again this September? Ross planted this story with the help of Mike Rogers. Mike Rogers admits he worked to have this story timed. And it is strange how the information was planted on some know-nothing website and picked up magically by Ross. What, did the out of the way website remind Ross crimes were possibly being committed that he learned about a year earlier and he should do something?

ABC News has a lot of explaining to do. Their story indicates they found out about this from that set-up website. Now Ross is admitting something else. I will say it again, anyone who hides a crime against children for personal gain is just as sick as the criminal who abused the child for personal pleasure. Something really stinks here. I cannot fathom anyone sitting on news that children could be undergoing sexual abuse for a year and not be criminally negligent.

Addendum: The excuses proffered by these media organizations about why they did not pursue the matter are identical to those offered up by Hastert. So if these news organizations (who had only the marginal emails - we have some suspicions about Ross and ABC who do not make that claim) then it is good enough for Hastert and company

Update: That website with the emails is probably a front, and possibly for a news organization. Recall the site was established in July and then check out this admission in the NY Times article:

Then, in June, the reports resurfaced on Capitol Hill, where a neighborhood resident struck up a conversation in a bar with someone who had provided the e-mail messages. He said he passed them on to several news outlets. The resident, who said he was not affiliated with either party and was motivated by concern for the teenager, would talk only on condition of anonymity.

Is it simply coincidence that a Capitol Hill resident (aka, partisan operative - they are the only ones who want to live on Capitol Hill) finds out about these emails and then this mystery site comes into creation a few weeks later? We need to know who runs that site.

Also checkout Mark Coffey's rundown of the mechanics of this smear campaign and ask yourself how all this could not be orchestrated.

Update: How old is this scandal? IBD now claims the scandalous emails date from 2003!

Now, what did Democrats know, and when did they know it?

…

As it is, Republicans deny knowing about the explicit text messages that Foley sent to a 16-year-old congressional page back in 2003. In repudiating Foley, House Speaker Dennis Hastert called the messages "vile and repulsive."

The smell factor on this 'story' just went up a few notches.

Foley, Pirro, Allen - Political Set-Ups?
Written by Doc Farmer
Tuesday, October 03, 2006




File this article under "Things That Make You Go Hmmm...."



First of all, let me make my meaning plain -- Former House Representative Mark Foley is a bastard. He's a scumbag. He's a sleazy pervert. He's a disgrace. I don't care if he laid a finger on any congressional pages or not. His Instant Messages were disgusting, and he had no business using his position of power to "flirt" with underage boys (or girls, if he were so inclined).



I do, however, have to ask this question. Why did the revelations take so long to be released? And why, particularly, now?



Apparently, these interchanges between Foley and a certain unnamed youth happened a long while back. At first, I heard only about the e-mail messages. I looked at them, and was singularly unimpressed. It wasn't lewd, lascivious, or perverted as far as I could determine. A few were a bit odd, but that was it.



Then I read the IMs. These were sickening. But they raised questions in my mind. How many people keep IM records? What systems actually record them? Why would anybody want to record them?



Well, the fact is somebody did. The Instant Messages were apparently written as long as three years ago! Yet nothing was done about this for many months. Until five weeks before an election. And on a Friday afternoon, just in time for plenty of analysis by all the "talking heads" political programs. Suddenly, all of the sordid details were immediately available for the world. At that point, Foley resigned. While he was right to do so (probably the only decent thing that jerk did), I have to wonder at the appearance of manufactured serendipity.



Oh, and you may also have heard about Jeanine Pirro. She was running for a Senate seat against the Hildebeast, but that didn't last very long. So, she started going after a state seat instead of federal -- Attorney General of New York State, if I'm not mistaken. However, she has an Achilles Heel in her past and present -- in the form of her husband. Apparently, he's a jerk and a jailbird and a philanderer. So, she has a quiet chat with Bernie Kerik (who used to work for Rudy Giuliani), to ask about whether she should bug her own personal property to see if hubby's been doing the mattress mambo with someone other than her. Suddenly, there is a great hue and cry over her asking such questions while taking no action. Nobody seems to be concerned that the conversation between her and Kerik was bugged, though. Nor do they seem to be asking why they were being bugged.



And then there's George Allen, who is running for another Senate seat. Suddenly, his opponent is bringing up claims of racism and Allen's use of the "N" word in the past. Allen's been in plenty of elections prior to this most recent run. No word, no hint of racism has ever appeared prior to this. Oh, and by the way, I don't see the term "macaca" as racist. If Allen wanted to be racist, he would have called that jerk with the camera "Apu Nahasapeemapetilon." Assuming he was a fan of "The Simpsons," and assuming that he could pronounce it, of course.



All of these things have happened within a couple of weeks.



By the way, Allen's opponent, James Webb, allegedly yelled the "N" word at folks in San Diego in his earlier years, until he and his fellow buddies were caught one time and had seven kinds of crap beaten out of them by a group of men who were the target of their racist tirade. Nobody seems to be asking the same questions of Webb that they are of Allen.



Now, I'm not heavily into conspiracy theory. Nevertheless, I do have to wonder about such a flush of "coincidence." All coming in a very close time frame. All having to do with items which we are NOT yet sure are crimes, if at all (and yes, as disgusting as Foley's actions are, we are not sure if any LAWS were broken yet -- although if his actions weren't illegal, they bloody well should have been!)



And one other coincidence. All of them were rep/con/tairs (Republicans for our friends in Rio Linda).



Political sleaze is nothing new, of course. Nevertheless, the impression being put forward in the MSM is that ONLY the rep/con/tairs are capable of it. All at the same time, I might add -- very closely tied to the upcoming election.



While Foley resigned, and rightly so, there are many lib/dem/soc/commies who have committed illicit and illegal acts (or have been accused of same) and continue along with their political lives as if almost nothing has changed. The first modern "intern" scandal, the Congressional Page scandal of 1983, was committed by Gerry Studds (D- Massachusetts) and Daniel Crane (R-Illinois).



Gerry Studds didn't apologize, and didn't repent his actual acts of sexual intercourse with an underage male page. Nevertheless, he kept his seat (even after turning his back on the Congress while their bill of censure was read), and was re-elected several times. Crane apologized for having sexual intercourse with an underage female page, and was voted out the next year.



Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts) was paying a male prostitute/boyfriend out of his own pocket (which, by the way, was filled by the pay that you and I provided via our taxes), and the boyfriend/prostitute was running a brothel out of Frank's basement. Barney is still in office.



William Jefferson (D-Louisiana) had about $100 grand stuffed in his freezer. He is currently under investigation for a number of crimes, but the most he's had to "suffer" is the removal from a House committee. Jefferson is still in office.



Patrick Kennedy (D-Massachusetts) got messed up on booze and pills and rammed into a security cordon with his car. He denied it, lied about it, and then decided to "get help" with an addiction problem and dodged the political bullet. Kennedy is still in office.



Cynthia McKinney (D-Georgia) violated House security, refused three calls for her to stop, and then SLUGGED A COP! She cried "racism" and did not offer an actual apology for her actions -- just how her actions were "interpreted." McKinney is still in office (although, thankfully, her constituency have voted her out in the primary earlier this year).



The lib/dem/soc/commies have been trying EVERYTHING possible to oust their rep/con/tair opponents. They've lied, they've misdirected, and they've even aided and abetted the release of classified documents in a time of war.



It would not surprise me one whit if these "revelations" were part of an overall coordinated lib/dem/soc/commie campaign to smear their opponents in order for them to regain power. They can't seem to regain power with honest debate. They can't seem to regain power with honest elections, from photo-ID'd voters with American citizenship. So, dig up the dirt and start shoveling the ****. And start demanding investigations of the House rep/con/tair leadership with a "what did they know and when did they know it" point of view. I wonder if they're mixing the tar and plucking the feathers in anticipation.



By the way, have you noticed how quickly the "Clinton Loses His Temper" story has died, since Foley's illicit story has surfaced? Despite the fact that it was proven that Clinton lied in that interview? Indeed, according to Oliver North, Clinton actually violated the law by targeting an assassination of bin Laden while three Presidential Orders were in place which prohibited such actions. No word yet on whether anyone is demanding an investigation. I'm not holding my breath.



No matter what the timing, Foley's actions were disgusting and, very hopefully, illegal -- I say hopefully, because I'd like to see anybody who abuses their power in this fashion to be thrown in jail for a very long time.



Even so, I have to seriously question the circumstances under which this and other politically-motivated stories have found the light of day. Or more accurately, the spotlight of a very slanted lib/dem/soc/commie-oriented Mainstream Media.



Like I said, "Things That Make You Go Hmmm...."

It's a vast Left-wing conspiracy.

FreeDuck wrote:

It's a vast Left-wing conspiracy.

Nahhhh ... just politics as usual - sleaze is part-and-parcel of The Silly Season, and there's nothing juicier than a sex scandal - even if there's no sex.

Strangely enough, an actual sexual encounter would have been less illegal than the internet conversation, per laws championed by Foley himself

Cycloptichorn

I, and I think many others, are not as concerned with the criminality of the issue as we are the morality of the issue - not just the sex (bad enough) but the coverup (even worse).

I pledge that if any Dems are found out to be involved, I want their goddamned heads on a stick, I don't care if it means we never win another election....
Cycloptichorn

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Strangely enough, an actual sexual encounter would have been less illegal than the internet conversation, per laws championed by Foley himself

Cycloptichorn

And strangely enough, the eMails and IMs produced to date appear to have been authored prior to the enactment of those laws - meaning, whatever else, theose laws do not apply to what Foley did. Again, not excusing Foley of anything - just observing the spin machine - on both sides - is in high gear.

I, and I think many others, are not as concerned with the criminality of the issue as we are the morality of the issue - not just the sex (bad enough)

but the coverup (even worse).

I pledge that if any Dems are found out to be involved, I want their goddamned heads on a stick ...