Media failed us again
Mon, Oct 2, 2006
Media Matters
Media uncritically reported Hastert's defense that Foley emails GOP leaders saw were only "over friendly"
Summary: In reporting on the scandal surrounding former Rep. Mark Foley, a number of media outlets have reported simply that the House Republican leadership claims to have been aware only of "over friendly" emails Foley sent in 2005, without noting that Hastert appeared to have made no effort to determine the actual content of the emails -- including one in which Foley wrote of an underage male page: "[H]es [sic] in really great shape."
In reporting on the scandal surrounding former Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL), who abruptly resigned from Congress on September 29 amid allegations that he sent sexually explicit emails and instant messages to underage former congressional pages, a number of media outlets have reported simply that the House Republican leadership claims to have been aware only of "over friendly" emails Foley sent in 2005. None of these outlets noted, however, that, at all opportunities, Hastert's office appeared to have made no effort to determine the actual content of the emails -- including one in which Foley wrote of an underage male page: "[H]es [sic] in really great shape."
The government watchdog group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, posted the emails Foley sent to a 16-year-old former page in 2005 on its website, including this one mentioned above:
I just emailed will ... hes [sic] such a nice guy ... acts much older than his age ... and hes [sic] in really great shape ... I am [sic] just finished riding my bike on a 25 mile journey now heading to the gym ... whats [sic] school like for you this year?
In late 2005, Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-LA) learned of the series of emails exchanged between Foley and a page Alexander had sponsored. The page forwarded the emails to Alexander's office and strung the word "sick" together 13 times in describing them. Alexander's chief of staff then reportedly contacted House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert's (R-IL) office about the emails, describing them as "over friendly." Hastert's office reportedly directed Alexander's office to contact the House clerk about the matter. There is no indication that Hastert's office inquired as to the content of the emails.
Then-House clerk Jeff Trandahl and Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL), chairman of the House Page Board, were approached by Alexander's office about Foley's emails. According to a September 30 St. Louis Post-Dispatch article, both men read the actual emails: "Although there was nothing sexually suggestive in the emails, Shimkus and Trandal [sic] agreed: 'That was enough for us to approach Mark,' Shimkus recalled [in] an interview Saturday." This version of events contradicts that of Hastert's office. According to a September 30 press release from Hastert's office:
The Clerk asked to see the text of the email. Congressman Alexander's office declined citing the fact that the family wished to maintain as much privacy as possible and simply wanted the contact to stop. The Clerk asked if the email exchange was of a sexual nature and was assured it was not. Congressman Alexander's Chief of Staff characterized the email exchange as over-friendly.
The Clerk then contacted Congressman Shimkus, the Chairman of the Page Board to request an immediate meeting. It appears he also notified [Ted] Van Der Meid [Hastert's chief counsel] that he had received the complaint and was taking action.
In a September 30 statement, Rep. Thomas Reynolds (R-NY), chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, indicated that he asked to see the content of the emails after Alexander approached him in the spring of 2006, but was denied by Alexander, who, according to Reynolds, "told me that the parents didn't want the matter pursued." Reynolds claimed he told Hastert of the conversation he had with Alexander regarding Foley's emails (Hastert's office has claimed that Hastert does not recall this conversation, but "has no reason to dispute Congressman Reynold's recollection.").
House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) also reportedly acknowledged telling Hastert about Foley's emails in the spring of 2006, though he later changed his story, saying he could not remember whether he contacted Hastert.
Regardless, Hastert has given no indication that he or his office sought to learn the actual contents of Foley's emails and to determine whether or not they were simply "over friendly," despite the fact that the matter was reportedly brought before his office as many as three different times. Indeed, Hastert's letter to the Justice Department asking for a federal investigation into the affair describes just one email: "This email was determined to be 'over friendly' by Representative Alexander's office but was not sexual in nature."
Nevertheless, several media outlets have simply repeated Hastert's "over friendly" excuse for not investigating the matter. In an October 1 article, The New York Times reported that "Congressional Republican leaders said the messages, which an Alexander aide described to them as 'overfriendly,' were much less explicit than the others that came to light," and noted simply that Foley, in his emails, "asked about the well-being of the boy." Though the Times noted that Alexander's former page described the emails as "sick," the Times has yet to note Foley's "really great shape" email. According to the Times article:
Aides to the speaker and other Congressional Republican leaders said the messages, which an Alexander aide described to them as ''overfriendly,'' were much less explicit than the others that came to light after ABC News first disclosed the e-mail correspondence with Mr. Alexander's page. The aides said Mr. Alexander's office, at the request of the page's family, did not show them copies of the messages. In those messages, sent after Hurricane Katrina, Mr. Foley asked about the well-being of the boy, a Monroe, La., resident. He wrote: ''How are you weathering the hurricane ... are you safe ... send me a pic of you as well.'' The page sent the note to a former colleague, describing it as ''sick.''
In another message, Mr. Foley wrote, ''What do you want for your birthday coming up ... what stuff do you like to do.''
The e-mail exchanges that came to light after the first news reports were far more graphic. When he was confronted about them on Friday, Mr. Foley resigned. Republican leaders said they had not known about the other e-mail correspondence.
Similarly, the Associated Press reported on October 2 that Hastert said Foley's emails "were not viewed as 'sexual in nature' ":
Hastert acknowledged that his staff had been made aware of concerns about what they termed "over-friendly" e-mails Foley had sent to the teenager -- including one requesting his picture -- in the fall of 2005, and that they referred the matter to the House clerk.
But Hastert said those e-mails were not viewed as "sexual in nature" and that he was not aware of "a different set of communications which were sexually explicit ... which Mr. Foley reportedly sent another former page or pages."
The AP, however, had previously noted that Hastert described one of the pages as being "in great shape." From a September 30 AP article: " 'he's such a nice guy,' Foley wrote about the other boy. 'acts much older than his age ... and hes [sic] in really great shape ... i am [sic] just finished riding my bike on a 25 mile journey now heading to the gym ... whats [sic] school like for you this year?' "
On the October 2 broadcast of NBC's Today, correspondent Mike Taibbi reported that the House Republican leadership did not know "about any overtly sexual messages":
TAIBBI: At least five Republican house members did know ahead of time, some nearly a year ago, about e-mails described as "over-friendly" that Foley sent a 16-year-old male page, though not about any overtly sexual messages.
USA Today reported on October 2:
Hastert has acknowledged that his aides were made aware of concerns about what they called "over-friendly" e-mails -- including one requesting the boy's picture -- in fall 2005, and that they referred the matter to the House clerk.
But Hastert has said that those e-mails were not viewed as "sexual in nature" and that he was not aware of "a different set of communications which were sexually explicit ... which Mr. Foley reportedly sent another page."
As the weblog Think Progress noted, even conservative pundit Bay Buchanan, appearing on the October 2 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, said: "I know one thing: that e-mail they call an 'overly friendly e-mail' -- that had predator stamped all over it."
Conservative 'Wash Times' Calls for Speaker Hastert to Step
Conservative 'Wash Times' Calls for Speaker Hastert to Step Down
By E&P Staff
Published: October 02, 2006 11:30 PM ET
In a Tuesday editorial, the conservative Washington Times calls on Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert to step down amid the scandal surrounding the Rep. Mark Foley affair.
"The facts of the disgrace of Mark Foley, who was a Republican member of the House from a Florida district until he resigned last week, constitute a disgrace for every Republican member of Congress," the newspaper declares. "Red flags emerged in late 2005, perhaps even earlier, in suggestive and wholly inappropriate e-mail messages to underage congressional pages. His aberrant, predatory -- and possibly criminal -- behavior was an open secret among the pages who were his prey. The evidence was strong enough long enough ago that the speaker should have relieved Mr. Foley of his committee responsibilities contingent on a full investigation to learn what had taken place, whether any laws had been violated and what action, up to and including prosecution, were warranted by the facts. This never happened....
" Late yesterday afternoon, Mr. Hastert insisted that he learned of the most flagrant instant-message exchange from 2003 only last Friday, when it was reported by ABC News. This is irrelevant. The original e-mail messages were warning enough that a predator -- and, incredibly, the co-chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children -- could be prowling the halls of Congress. The matter wasn't pursued aggressively. It was barely pursued at all. Moreover, all available evidence suggests that the Republican leadership did not share anything related to this matter with any Democrat. ...
"House Speaker Dennis Hastert must do the only right thing, and resign his speakership at once. Either he was grossly negligent for not taking the red flags fully into account and ordering a swift investigation, for not even remembering the order of events leading up to last week's revelations -- or he deliberately looked the other way in hopes that a brewing scandal would simply blow away."
The rest of the editorial can be found at:
www.washtimes.com.
The libs will do anything possible to get that pig Pelosi in power.
FBI Knew in July About Foley E-Mails to Teen
Charles Babington and Jonathan Weisman / Washington Post | October 3 2006
The FBI acknowledged yesterday that it did not begin an investigation in late July after receiving copies of e-mails sent in 2005 by then-Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) to a Louisiana teenager -- messages that troubled the boy's parents.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/October2006/031006Foley.htm
Ex-page threatened over role in Foley flap
By McClatchy News Service
Originally posted on October 03, 2006
A former male House page from Louisiana has received threats since reports surfaced Friday that former Rep. Mark Foley sent him inappropriate e-mails, another congressman said Monday night.
"This teenager and his family have gone through hell," GOP Rep. Rodney Alexander of Louisiana said.
Alexander wouldn't say what type of threats the teenager was receiving, or the source of the threats.
Alexander sponsored the then-16-year-old's service as a House page but said the teenager worked for the House clerk. The boy, who is from Monroe, La., is now 17.
"It's just not fair that they got caught up in this and became casualties," Alexander said. "His mother is just broken up by it. Naturally, she's concerned about her child."
http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/artikkel?Dato=20061003&Kategori=NEWS01&Lopenr=61003003&Ref=AR
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.
We'll see. There is the question of what was known, and when, and you know as well as I that Democrats don't have to do a damn thing to advance this story; because it is about sex, the media will run with it for a long, long time, because sex sells well.
There may be other congressmen dragged into this as well:
Quote:Tonight on ABC, investigative journalist Brian Ross suggested there may be other members of Congress who engaged in inappropriate behavior towards congressional pages:
BRIAN ROSS: So far, Foley is the only member whose overt sexual approaches have been documented. Charlie?
CHARLES GIBSON: The only one to be documented, but are there other shoes to drop?
ROSS: We're hearing quite a bit from former pages. They're sending us all sorts of messages about possible other members.
All those who champion a particular party better pray that their number doesn't come up in this thing, there's absolutely no telling which way it could go.
Cycloptichorn
Okie, Foley had no option but to resign. The biggest issue here is the coverup by the Republican leadership, of which we will hear a lot more.
BTW, you guys keep bringing up Studds. However, I don't think there was any coverup in that matter.
What coverup? I've seen no evidence yet. If there is, then lets find out, but what if Dems had this dope and waited until the right time to release it? That would be a coverup as well.
Source: Albuquerque Journal, 03.10.06, page 5
ABC producer says network to name names in Foley scandal
RAW STORY
Published: Tuesday October 3, 2006
ABC will soon report who had knowledge of the Mark Foley page scandal, and when they became aware of it, RAW STORY has learned.
In an interview with DemocracyNow, ABC's Maddy Sauer has shared some startling facts about the story.
Pages have, according to Sauer, been able to produce instant message conversations going back as far as five years. Some of them are reportedly sexually explicit.
The FBI, Sauer claims, will be interviewing pages starting today.
Sauer also indicated that ABC's next wave of reports on the Foley scandal will focus on who in Congress was aware of the situation, how much they knew, and when they were alerted.
Okie, don't you read the news, or are you just acting dumb? Hastert said he first heard about Foley's e-mails very recently. It then turns out that people spoke to him last year. Boehner first says he spoke to Hastert about Foley, then said he was unsure of this, and then said he didn't speak to him. Other Republican leaders knew for some time about Foley's actions and did nothing to stop them.
Quote:What coverup? I've seen no evidence yet. If there is, then lets find out, but what if Dems had this dope and waited until the right time to release it? That would be a coverup as well.
Not really, though I have seen this line advanced by some on the right.
Part of the problem with this argument lies in, once again, who knew what and when they knew it. In the case of the news media, there was some knowledge that Foley was gay and some knowledge that he may have been a little too friendly with his pages. The 'emails' that originally started this mess off were known by a few news organizations, and CREW, a group that primarily investigates Republicans (though, I would say that this has more to do with the fact that the Republicans are the ones in the place to be corrupted at the moment; I don't doubt that if it were Dems in the All-majority position, there would be plenty of them in trouble too). CREW reportedly gave the Emails to ABC, who started to research the story, and to the FBI, who did something with the emails that we don't know about yet.
The 'instant messages,' which contained quite lewd and damning content, were according to ABC sent to them once they started interviewing and contacting former pages to see if they had any info on the story. Apparently this is an ongoing process, as ABC has said there is more to come out.
But, it seems that Hastert is in big trouble no matter what happens, and possibly other top Republican leaders in the House. It all depends on when they knew about the problem, and what they failed to do about it. It is somewhat telling that there existed a board who managed the Pages in Congress, two republicans and a dem, and only the senior republican was told about it, and he didn't do anything. The other two page board members are pissed that they weren't informed, and there certainly wasn't an investiagtion done. There doesn't seem to be much of an explanation for this at the moment, and it's a problem for the Republicans.
As I said earlier, who knows who else will be wrapped up in this? I don't think anyone is surprised that there could be more congressmen who were doing inappropriate things.
Cycloptichorn
"What coverup? I've seen no evidence yet." Seems to me the FBI dropped the ball by not investigating in July. Certainly the IMs we've seen are incriminating. I got no problem accusing the FBI of coverup along with Hastert and others.
Timber gives us strawmen. Those Dems are no longer around. We are now talking about the Foley matter, including any coverup. I guess the guys on the right think that everyone can be distracted by bringing up actions by the Dems, despite being ancient history.
Yes, a guy named Boehner being involved is classic.
Interesting that the source for the editorial that Timber wrote is the
Investor's Business Daily.
Quote:
We have a lot more questions about this whole affair. The timing of the revelations, as we noted, couldn't be more propitious for the Democrats. Turns out both the Democrats and several newspapers seem to have known about Foley's problem as far back as November, according to research by several enterprising blogs.
Which blogs have found out that the Democrats knew about this in November?
Quote:
Why didn't they come forward then? Who dredged up these e-mails -- and why did they hold them until now? This reeks of political trickery.
CREW, the known releaser of these Emails, says they sent them to the FBI as well as news organizations. I think this author is all wet.
But, we all know, when you can't defend... attack attack attack!
Cycloptichorn
