Posted on 10/02/2006 1:27:37 PM PDT by areafiftyone
WASHINGTON - At least one former congressional page is disputing another former page's claims that pages were warned five years ago to beware of U.S. Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fort Pierce.
Matthew Loraditch, a page in the 2001-2002 class, told ABC News he and other pages were warned about Foley by a supervisor in the House Clerk's office. Loraditch, the president of the Page Alumni Association, said the pages were told "don't get too wrapped up in him being too nice to you and all that kind of stuff."
But another page, who asked not to be named told The Palm Beach Post, "The program in no official capacity warned us about it," and he said that Loraditch had posted an explanation for his comments to ABC on the college social network, Facebook.com.
Loraditch's Facebook.com statement said: "I have received several heated responses from my fellow pages about media involvement in the current situation. I want to respond with a few points and thoughts.
"Firstly, as to the ABC "Warned" story, while I may have inadvertently used the word, "warned," in communication, I can assure you it was not intended. The fact of the matter is in an informal situation a supervisor mentioned that Foley was a bit odd or flaky and did not connote by tone or otherwise that he should be avoided.
"Secondly as to talking out in general, . . . I don't think anyone can argue that protecting kids, pages, or whomever from sexual predators is anything but the most important of this whole saga. Nothing comes in front of the safety of the page program, not the page program, a member of congress, no one.
"Thirdly, I have stressed several key points in my contact with media that all situations with Mr. Foley occurred after we had finished our service as pages. That if anything had happed while we were in Washington, it would have been dealt with. That I have full faith and trust that any of the supervisors and staff we worked with would have properly dealt with any situation like the current one. That the page program is one of the most wonderful and educational experiences a youth can have.
"Fourthly, although not all of you know people who have had these horrible conversation with Foley, I do. And frankly that gives me all the more reason to speak out. . . .
"Finally, if i have hurt or offended anyone, I am sorry. And I love my page friends and I cherish my relationships with the page program staff, however fracture some of this may have made them. I want you all to know that I truly believe that I'm doing the best that I can do."
The other page said most pages are angry at Loraditch's comments and that the page program did its best to ensure the safety of pages, with strict rules and curfews.
Also Monday, the placard that once designated Foley's office was gone early this morning, two days after he resigned amid allegations of inappropriate communications with a minor.
Around 10:30 a.m., a congressional employee put up a new sign reading, "Office of the 16th Congressional District of Florida.
I also want to know why the heck the two different age requirements. Boy, does that stink to high Heaven.
Why didn't Matthew speak out sooner?
-PJ
AS THE PAGE TURNS!
Senators like them younger.
I'm at the point of wanting the whole lot of them thrown out.
Check this out.
LOL
So far, so good.:)
I'm beginning to think this was orchestrated by the page that claimed to be warned about Foley in the first place.
Maybe it isn't something that is meant to be mean, but to teach the Rep who championed harsh punishment for internet predators a lesson about how easy it is to fake evidence that would convict someone under the new laws.
He could simply use the same techniques as the marketing groups use to generate internet buzz. Post anonymously in blogs and internet forums. Create rumors, create blogs specifically for the purpose of generating buzz. It could look like you're 10 or 100 people but really you are just one guy with a lot of different accounts.
From here on out, I hope everyone who speaks is put under oath. Foley is in rehab for alcoholism. Seems it's either alcohol, "prescription" drugs or bi polar.
We need to stop electing people with those problems.
I agree.
Essentially, the only thing that is being disputed is whether the pages were warned or not.
There appears to be no dispute over the fact that Foley sent sexually explicit messages to the page in question. What he did remains inappropriate and disgusting (to say the least).
Amen. And supporting parties that aid and abet them.
Just saw it.
This cracked me and my daughter up:
"What Jimmy didn't know was that Ralph was sick .... You see, Ralph was a ho-mo-sexual."
That was hilarious!
I thought you may have had a sense of something "off" in the comments of Loraditch so I thought you would be interested in this retraction.
Doesn't it say that "the Page" in question wasn't a page when he was contacted by Foley?
Let's follow this logically if this happened three years ago and after this young man was a page, and the young man in question is 22 years old today, he had to be nineteen when it happened?
The Sixteen year old number comes from when he was allowed to be a page, not when he stopped being a page but when he could become a page.
The lie here is one of omission, the media isn't telling us how old he was when he recieved the "IMs" or the e-mails, only that pages start at 16 years old.
Although this seems to clear up the question of whether the IMs were sent to a person while they were a page or not -- it looks like the IMs were sent to a person who had completed serving as a page.
Which means it's back to being an old gay guy hitting on a young man -- For all we know, the young man was actually 18 at the time.
Still glad he's gone, but it's hard to see how the republicans could be expected to "punish" someone for IMs they didn't know about sent to people who were not working for the House and who did not complain to anybody.
There's a whole host of incumbents I suspect are alcoholic, dishonest, lazy and too power hungry to be in office, but voters continue to reelect these people even after their problems or shady dealings have been exposed.
Patrick Kennedy will undoubtedly be reelected, and Duke Cunningham won reelection several times after scandals had emerged about him. It took a trial and a conviction to get him out of office and I liked him, but knew he was a heavy drinker for many years even though I didn't live in his district.
It seems a conviction is necessary to get them out of ooice. I can cite others too --- Dan Rostenkowski; Jim (beam me up Scotty) with the long surname, and the congressman from IL who messed with a teenage firl. There's others.
We have too many flawed people holding elected office.
The media preys on public ignorance by using innuendo and incomplete reporting.
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.