Posted on 10/06/2006 11:57:43 AM PDT by 300magnum
Eleven House Republicans on Thursday told Democratic leaders they want them to appear before the House Ethics Committee to answer questions about what they may have known -- and failed to disclose -- about former Rep. Mark Foley's communications with congressional pages.
Led by Rep. Jack Kingston (Ga.), vice chairman of the House Republican Conference, the group sent letters to Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) and Democratic National Chairman Howard Dean. The Republicans say Democrats shouldn't be absolved from answering questions about the scandal, especially in light of suspicions that the crisis was orchestrated as a political move to harm Republicans.
Just as it must be determined whether any Republican Members or political operatives were aware of and attempted to conceal Mr. Foley’s activities, it must also be determined whether any Democrat Members or political operatives were aware of, and attempted to conceal these same activities.
Therefore, we respectfully ask that you appear, under oath, before the House Ethics Committee.
In addition to Kingston, signatories include Representatives Kay Granger (Tex.), Phil Gingrey (Ga.), Bill Shuster (Pa.), Lee Terry (Neb.), Tom Price (Ga.), Louie Gohmert (Tex.), Joe Wilson (S.C.), Lynn Westmoreland (Ga.), Roger Wicker (Miss.) and John Shadegg (Ariz.).
In a statement sent to bloggers late Thursday afternoon, Kingston said the following:
This sad episode should not be a partisan issue. It reflects poorly on the Congress as a whole and weakens the trust of the American people. In order to restore that trust we must complete this investigation in a thorough and non-partisan fashion. All Members of the House, our staff, and members of the public regardless of political party should come forward and provide whatever information they know. We need to get to the bottom of who knew about Mr. Foley's inexcusable actions, when did they know about it, when did they first become aware of the Instant Messages in question, and what did they do with that information. As Republicans we expect, and so far have seen, nothing less from our Leaders and today we are asking for the same full cooperation from Democratic Leaders.
Do we all think Foley would have been the ONLY critter to hit on the pages, male or female?
I can't believe I just saw the words 'ethics' and 'Democrats' used in the same sentence.
more FYI pings
They will refuse. That will make them look bad. Nice going.
HA ha!
And now the backpedalling by the dems will begin. The cries of "Oh, no! It's just the Republicans who hit on interns. . . er, I mean PAGES!" will start, and Foleygate will fade into the mist, to be replaced by the next contrived "scandal" from the dems' dog-eared playbook.
bttt
YES! They want bi-partisanship, by God, make them walk the walk!
Good to see Joe Wilson (my former Congressman from South Carolina) on there. You have no idea how happy I would be to see Joe Wilson take the next step and slap Lindsay Graham out of the Republican nomination for Senate when Graham's seat comes up.
}:-)4
I was thinking the same thing.
I hope that when the Democrats accuse the Republicans of using these hearings for politics, the GOP rams that accusation back down the throats of the Dems.
Good deal.
I will take "an editor that has an understanding of the English language and grammar" for $200.
Good! Let's see how many talking heads are able to say the following:
"Ms. Pelosi, will you swear under oath that you had absolutely no advance knowledge (until released on last Friday afternoon) of the existence and/or nature of the electronic communications between Mr. Foley and the any of pages?"
"Would you be willing to submit to a polygraph test to demonstrate your veracity to the American people?"
"If you had even one day's advance knowledge, why did you hold back on the information if it would possibly endanger the pages in question?"
"Could you explain to the American people your relationship to or knowledge of Robin Katsaros, her son, and/or any projects involving a book about the life of pages in DC?"
[I wrote them out to use in case they couldn't muster the wherewithal to generate the questions themselves ...]
I recall, at some time in the past, one 'critter making a statement about the page program being a "congressional sex smorgasbord".
Not sure of the context but this is ringing a bell. In ay have been in the context of, "We don't want this to be viewed as...".
Anyone else remember? It may have been from the Reynolds scandal.
She will not even acknowledge that she received the letter asking her to appear. It won't be reported in the press either.
Oh, yesss. Let's see Pelosi, under oath, slither her way out of this one. While we're at it, let's get Brian Ross, ABC and the rest of the DBM under oath.
Not really! Pelosi Ligosi refused to approve of FREEH to investigate and the DBM ignored it.
The ETHICS committee will get NO cooperation from the Dims and it will barely be a whisper in the media.
IMHO the results of the ETHICS committee will be nothing more than the GOP falling on it's own sword.......they are masters at self-immolation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.