Did Democrats Page Mark Foley?

Investors ^ | 10/2/2006

[beaversmom]

Scandal: Right after Mark Foley was revealed to have had inappropriate e-mail conversations with a 16-year-old page, he resigned and checked into rehab. Now, what did Democrats know, and when did they know it?

Yes, you read that right: the Democrats. It's of course clear that Foley, a Republican representative from Florida, resigned for good cause. We don't defend him or his inexcusable behavior — good riddance.

But it didn't take long at all after Foley's resignation for the Democrats to call for an investigation of the entire Republican leadership in the House, charging that GOP stalwarts knew early on that Foley, as they like to say in the rehab business, had a "problem."

Democrats have begun losing their once-significant lead in the polls, and a mere five weeks remain until the midterm elections. Is this scandal the Democrats' own "October Surprise," meant to throw the GOP into a tailspin shortly before the vote?

Recent polls show Democrats aren't doing very well on several key issues. What better way than a good, old-fashioned sex scandal to get people's minds off such things as the importance of winning the war in Iraq, our ongoing vulnerability to terrorist attack and the necessity of keeping the Bush economic boom going?

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."

Despite this, the immediate take by Democrats and much of the mainstream media was that this was a classic example of Republican hypocrisy — talking "morals" and "values" while all the time shielding a child predator. But it was nothing of the kind...

[staytrue]

since Foley broke the law

What law did Foley break ?

[staytrue]

Lets get down to human decency.

Yes. But what did Foley do ? I did not think that thinking and talking about doing things were all that bad.

You should see some of the things I dream about in my sleep. I've even "killed" in my sleep. I've never come close in real life though.

If this guy did something in real life, it's the slammer.

[norton]

Tnx for the link

[Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit]

Not really. It's already backfiring on them.

Do you have any evidence of that? It doesn't really jive with what I am seeing. At best its a wash.

[Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit]

Interesting theory. On the one hand it would seem to make a lot of sense. On the other, it is hard to believe that such an agreement would stand given the rancorous climate n Congress these days. I suppose if there is such an agreement, it would be the true nuclear option.

[dannyboy72]

Thanks...I read about this before the IMs came to light. I'm very interested to hear who had these IMs and how they got their hands on them and why they waited to make them public until 5 weeks before an election.

I have been trying to figure out scenerios on how Congressman Alexander would approach the leadership about emails and NOT know about the Instant Messages. I am becoming suspicious that the Dems in fact did know about the emails and the IMs and sent the matter through the reporting chain with only the emails - telling the Reps that there was nothing sexual. Once the leadership did what they should do under the known circumstances, the DEMS feed the IMs to the media and say the Republicans knew about the "messages" (technically true) and did nothing about them. If this was the ploy or something similar, i guarantee it had to cross Pelosi's ear/mouth.

This could have been planned for years (2003) and been part of the DEMS "culture of corruption" plan all along. With their willful accomplices in the media, they pull the slight of hand, telling the public the Republican Leaership knew about messages between Foley and the boy - and then immediately go to trounce of the Reps instead of actually clarifying to the public that the leadership knew only about Foley's request for a picture and birthday list and nothing about sexual content.

If the media truly cared about the truth, everytime a DEM cited the REPs knew and did nothing, they would say, "but didn't they only know about his request for a photo and a birthday list and nothing about any sexual advances or content?". They won't cause they don't (care about the truth that is). They only care about what these projecting Libs wish had happened -- that the pompous, moral Republicans covered up the sexual advances of a child predator when they campaign for outlawing Gay marriage and for Jessica's law, etc. -- The libs wish it happened, so the media will try to use a few facts to make the public think it happened. Very pathetic when a party has to do these kind of things every year to TRY to win elections.

[Eastbound]

"I suppose if there is such an agreement, it would be the true nuclear option"

M.A.D. Gone Wild!

[AmeriBrit]

YW :>)

[gardencatz]

Do you have any evidence of that? It doesn't really jive with what I am seeing. At best its a wash.

You can't be serious?! Once the republican leadership found out about the sexually explicit IM's they immediately asked for Foley's resignation and also requested an investigation to be conducted, not just into Foley's conduct but who knew about and/or kept copies of the IM's rather than turning them over to the proper authorities. That puts dems in the hot seat because it appears the IM's came from groups/people affiliated with them.

There are now a multitude of bloggers investigating this entire situation (think Dan Rather). So far they've learned that the emails and IM's were exchanged after they finished their stint as pages, in the case of the emails it's the boy who seems to have initiated them. There's also a ton of evidence that the emails have been altered. While some on the left are trying to make these out to be simple changes made by a spell checker on one of the emails the subject has been changed from (no subject) to email #2. Software has come a long way but I don't know any spell checker that can change the actual subject line.

Then there's the IM's. In the comments at Passionate America blog, Wild Bill provided some additional information about the IM's:

"The emails and the IMs are not the same to the same person. I have proof. One of the pepole Mark Foley emailed is now 20 to 21 years of age. The IMs started with that person a few weeks before he turned 18 (Feb 23, 2003). Foley did know the person was underage and he should be in deep trouble for that, but the alleged contact in San Diego happened after the page was 18. Foley is still a piece of shit, and he should have resigned, but to blame Hastert and pretend that the emails and the IMs were the same thing is completely dishonest on the Dems part."

Bloggers aren't doing this to benefit Foley. He's a creep and a predator and deserves whatever he's got coming to him, but it's disgusting for the dems & the media to try to drag decent people down with him, especially when those others are doing their best to cooperate, to do the right thing. Those that withheld the IM's to score political points need to be exposed as well. To have information that could potentially save a young person from being molested is aiding and abetting.

Cindie

[usmcobra]

Here is that link you are looking for, the one that says that Crist and Foley were once room mates and that the Democrats will exploit that relationship to their advantage. I guess in their minds having a democrat as governor in Florida will assure them of a win here in 2008.

[Right_in_Virginia]

BTTT

[Non-Sequitur]

As it is, Republicans deny knowing about the explicit text messages that Foley sent to a 16-year-old congressional page back in 2003.

I have a problem believing that the Democrats could know of these text messages and the Republican would not.

[NCLaw441]

You said: "Now the question is, since Foley broke the law, then why wasn't it reported at once by those who did know? And who are they? To sit on something like this for political gain is despicable behavior, and illegal."

Agree completely. Do we have any info on who reported? Foley adversary? Republican adversary? The Dems knew...and they knew more than the Republicans knew. That much seems obvious.
***

What Foley did was reprehensible, but is there any law that he broke? Interestingly, my initial research says the age of consent in DC is 16. Wasn't this (and all pages) at least 16? There was no sexual contact, as far as I know. Any information to the contrary?

I still think Foley stinks and was right to resign. Of course, the Dems should have no voice in this matter, having condoned Barney Frank, Gerry Studds, Clinton, etc. etc.

[panthermom]

I said that on Sunday. I have a 16 yr. old boy. I would jerk a knot in his tail for even responding to those e-mails. I really get the feeling it was a joke amongst the boys. It would not surprise me if someone found out about it, perhaps one of the older pages or interns, and conned the boys into responding to solicit more damaging replies. Imagine, being an intern and bringing down congressman from the oppossing party just before an election. You'd be the toast of the town. Nothing surprises me anymore when it comes to the nastiness of politics.

[usmcobra]

I have a problem believing that the Democrats could know of these text messages and the Republican would not.

I believe they manufactured these IMs and here is my proof.

This is a intentionally blurred version of the PDF of IMs from Foley to the page. Even blurred like this you can tell that the colors and the fonts change from one style to another and then back again during these sessions. That's important because it shows that whoever typed in that black added section didn't know how to change the fonts and the colors to what were actually used by Foley and the page. Additionally changing the text on those parts that were actually copied would allow the font and the color to remain the same as long as the line was not removed entirely.

But perhaps to me at least the most damning of all in the case that these were fakes is the fact that that there are NO DATES at all on any of the IM pages I have viewed. No Dates mean no way to prove that Foley was otherwise involved in other activities that would have prevented him for IMing this young man.

Even if Foley is guilty of being Gay, and that is what we are really talking about, fabricating "evidence" to prove he is gay is the height of hypocrisy and should expect nothing less from the democrats.

[Fresh Wind]

Something smells here.

You detect the smell of Rats doing their dirty work.

[TheConservator]

Once again living up to your name

[Rb ver. 2.0]

"I did not think that thinking and talking about doing things were all that bad."

When it involves minors it is bad. When it involves arranging to meet with minors for purposes of sexual gratification it's Federally bad.

[Rb ver. 2.0]

"I really get the feeling it was a joke amongst the boys. It would not surprise me if someone found out about it, perhaps one of the older pages or interns, and conned the boys into responding to solicit more damaging replies."

I agree 100%. I think it's a prank that got way out of hand, there were several people who knew about it and someone talked.

Even so, that doesn't excuse the perversion. And perversion like that continues until it's manifest. I think there's a good chance that Foley has acted on that perversion before. Deceit and denial are trademark characteristics of people who have done this and have not yet been caught.

[jslade]

Oh don't get me wrong. Foley should rot in hell.

Don't get me wrong. I find such communications with a minor repulsive. But someone tell me. Exactly what law did the homo break?