Posted on 10/02/2006 6:26:51 PM PDT by Roscoe Karns
Edited on 10/02/2006 7:05:39 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
WASHINGTON TIMES ON TUESDAY WILL CALL FOR SPEAKER HASTERT'S RESIGNATION, NEWSROOM SOURCES TELL DRUDGE... DEVELOPING... Editorial titled: 'Resign, Mr. Speaker': 'House Speaker Dennis Hastert must do the only right thing, and resign his speakership at once... Mr. Hastert has forfeited the confidence of the public and his party, and he cannot preside over the necessary coming investigation, an investigation that must examine his own inept performance'... -- Washington Times, October 3, 2006...
Here's the WT's editorial calling for Hastert's resignation
Resign, Mr. Speaker
TODAY'S EDITORIAL
October 3, 2006
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. 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.
Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois, the Republican chairman of the House Page Board, said he learned about the Foley e-mail messages "in late 2005." Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, the leader of the Republican majority, said he was informed of the e-mail messages earlier this year. On Friday, Mr. Hastert dissembled, to put it charitably, before conceding that he, too, learned about the e-mail messages sometime earlier this year. 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.
Now the scandal must unfold on the front pages of the newspapers and on the television screens, as transcripts of lewd messages emerge and doubts are rightly raised about the forthrightness of the Republican stewards of the 109th Congress. Some Democrats are attempting to make this "a Republican scandal," and they shouldn't; Democrats have contributed more than their share of characters in the tawdry history of congressional sexual scandals. Sexual predators come in all shapes, sizes and partisan hues, in institutions within and without government. When predators are found they must be dealt with, forcefully and swiftly. This time the offender is a Republican, and Republicans can't simply "get ahead" of the scandal by competing to make the most noise in calls for a full investigation. The time for that is long past.
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. He gave phony answers Friday to the old and ever-relevant questions of what did he know and when did he know it? Mr. Hastert has forfeited the confidence of the public and his party, and he cannot preside over the necessary coming investigation, an investigation that must examine his own inept performance.
A special, one-day congressional session should elect a successor. We nominate Rep. Henry Hyde, also of Illinois, the chairman of the House International Relations Committee whose approaching retirement ensures that he has no dog in this fight. He has a long and principled career, and is respected on both sides of the aisle. Mr. Hyde would preside over the remaining three months of the 109th Congress in a manner best suited for a full and exhaustive investigation until a new speaker for the 110th Congress is elected in January, who can assume responsibility for the investigation.
http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20061002-102008-9058r.htm
yes, ashcroft said that very matter of fact - Berger stole the after action report for the millenium plot.
I have to get up early in the morning ... but I'll try to catch it later
Perhaps it is part of it. They did the same with Lott. We got Frist in return. They now whine about Frist without taking ownership for their part in bringing him to leadership and allowing him to be painted as a racist.
Anyway, about Hastert, I do think he should have been more pro-active when he got those E-Mails. But, that doesn't make him an accomplice to a pedophile which is the script being written right now. Calling for his resignation paints that picture, and that isn't fair to Hastert. It's debatable if a man in his position should have been more discerning of a character such as Foley's, but the luxury to define his dismissal over that issue of naivety is not an option in this climate. He'd be painted as supporting a child predator, and I don't think my conscience could live with that. Evidently the perfect ones out there like the malkin's and Times of the world can...but then Malkin spends days decrying a photoshop of her face on a bikini claiming bullies cannot be given into. Yet she thinks Hastert should give in to bullies that would paint him as accomodating to a predator. Interesting move on her part...
Hastert's probably through though. Name the last time the Republicans didn't toss their guy/gal overboard. Recently being Delay, which I'm still furious about. I have no faith in so called "conservatives" not to do the same now. This time it's the WATimes doing it, last time with Delay it was NRO. Next time it will be someone else and it'll keep continuing unless they finally stand up to the bullies.
I will say this much. People need to be careful about committing themselves to positions. Foley is 51 years old. he has been an adult for decades. In political life years. Pedophiles are not born at the age of 48. Likely there is far more to come that will be 100 times worse then known now. And I wouldn't be surprised if he had company in D.C. These predators usually seek and find their own to hang with.
Wake up. The end won't be immediate. But it will be sure and deadly.
So your point is? Look Drudge has a job to do and he does it very well. Let us be thankful he is on our side of the fence.
let's not mince words - the Times wanted Foley profiled by the leadership based on the fact that they knew about his sexuality - that's essentially what they are saying here.
They have corrected it to say resign from speakership, from leadership, not from congress. Still, I think it is over the top and too soon to even ask for that. Many facts are still unknown.
Murtha and the FBI: The Director's Cut
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10427
Murtah and abscam, why is the times not asking for resignation of Murtah.
Ops4
From what I understand, the IMs were to a different young man who had been a page the year before. We don't know anything about him (how old he was) and we don't know who saved them, and how it was verified they were legitimate. Foley did the right thing by resigning but took the chickensh@t way out by going into rehab since he's not available to answer any questions for the next month or so. This isn't a failure of the house leadership. There was nothing actionable in the emails that would have caused the House to censure or reprimand him.
very true.
and we've now set ourselves up such that anything and everything Foley may have done sexually - Hastert is responsible for.
this is insane.
They do in the posts I was responding to. Back in 2005, a Florida newspaper and some members of the house interpreted the e-mails as being overly friendly and there wasn't enough there to warrant a full investigation. It was only after the recent discovery of the IMs that all things changed. Yet when the media reports the findings by ABC they never mention the IMs letting the public believe that the GOP was aware as far back as 2005.
Oh, for God's sake! Aren't there any reporters at the Washington Times? They don't seem to be aware of any of the "known" facts of the case.
It truly is.
Absent Foley to smack around, Hastert is the scapegoat and performing the stand in role of a pedophile for those upset and frightened about the implications of what Foley has done.
It's insane and sick in its own fashion.
Uh-oh.
I guess the WaTimes didn't put a lot of thought into their recommendation of a replacement. LOL
A different young man? I certainly didn't know that. I thought it was the same boy that got the pic request in an email. Regardless, I'm having a hard time understanding why a teenager goes to the trouble of time stamping IM's that contain such subject matter. Please bear in mind as I said, I am not defending Foley or placing blame on whatever young man this time stamping just isn't sitting well with me.
ROFL! Cue the heavy breathing noise...
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.