Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hastert denies GOP saw Foley's "vile" messages (Conservatives calling for resignations.)
The Washington Times ^ | October 3, 2006 | Charles Hurt

Posted on 10/03/2006 6:43:59 AM PDT by no dems

House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert said yesterday that Republican leaders had not previously seen the more lurid Internet "instant messages" sent by disgraced ex-Rep. Mark Foley as influential conservatives began calling for party leadership resignations over the handling of the matter.

Mr. Hastert said "No one in the Republican leadership ... saw those messages until last Friday when ABC News released them."

Still, several well-known conservatives called for Republican resignations because Hastert and other leaders did not act aggressively enough when they first learned of a separate set of "overly friendly" e-mails that Mr. Foley had sent to another teenage former page.

"Speaker Hastert had knowledge of Congressman Foley's inappropriate behavior and chose to protect a potential pedophile" David Bossie, president of the conservative group Citizens United, said yesterday. "If Speaker Hastert was willing to sacrifice a child to protect Representative Foley's seat and his own leadership position, then he surely does not share our American and conservative values."

"When you have a 50-year-old man -- who is a known homosexual -- who wants a picture of a 16-year-old boy, that should send out some alarm bells," he said. "This is almost like a Clinton-type response."

"That e-mail they call an 'overly friendly' e-mail -- that had predator stamped all over it. There's just no one in this country that can suggest otherwise," said Bay Buchanan, the president of American Cause.

(Excerpt) Read more at insider.washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption
KEYWORDS: chickenlittle; demslittlehelper; hastert; soft; spite; wobbly
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-149 next last
To: Fiji Hill
Had Foley been a Democrat, he would have probably stood his ground and screamed, "witch hunt!" at his accusers. The liberals, MSM, and DU crowd would then have rallied around him.

True. But why sink to their level? They've more than reaped the whirlwind for their antics. Our party is just too stupid to spend its political capital during eight years of control in the legislative and executive branch.

Closing ranks over an issue like this would shatter the integrity of conservatism.

61 posted on 10/03/2006 8:05:27 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever ("My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." (2 Cor. 12:9))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever
Closing ranks over an issue like this would shatter the integrity of conservatism.

We're not trying to close ranks, we are trying to point out that Hastert (and the FBI and the parents) had nothing to go on in the emails. Now the media is conflating emails and IM's and saying monday morning quarterback Hastert should have known and fired Foley. That is ridiculous.

62 posted on 10/03/2006 8:09:34 AM PDT by palmer (Money problems do not come from a lack of money, but from living an excessive, unrealistic lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

No connection. wow, since 2002 I feel old.

seriously.

Serch for C.R.E.W. or CREW here on FR. DNC dirty tricks group.

Rush also mentioned this yesterday. The instant messages were held for three years.

Now it appears the ABC reporter held the instant messages from early august in order to time them.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com


63 posted on 10/03/2006 8:12:09 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: L98Fiero

Then why wasn't NANCY PELOSI the one out there confronting Mark Foley, as she (or her staff, at any rate) had the information, and did not pass it along to the revelant parties.

That action would have had nothing to do with the politics of the matter. It was conscience and good manners that should have dictated the actions. But in this case Nancy Pelosi held back the information, so it could be played for partisan advantage at a time when the impact would be most sharply felt.

Had this information been shared in a timely manner with Dennis Hastert, Mark Foley would have been asked to leave his office long ago, and nothing would have been said. But parents of one of the pages involved wanted to protect the page's privacy, and that sure was a lasting safeguard. So no more was done. The Republican leadership of the House thought the problem was resolved.


64 posted on 10/03/2006 8:13:37 AM PDT by alloysteel (In war, disproportionate force is the ONLY way to assure victory and subsequent peace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: palmer

we are trying to point out that Hastert (and the FBI and the parents) had nothing to go on in the emails. Now the media is conflating emails and IM's and saying monday morning quarterback Hastert should have known and fired Foley. That is ridiculous.

I do think there is confusion between the emails and the IMs, but I also think there's confusion over what should have occured regarding the emails.

I am not saying that Hastert should have fired Foley. I am saying that Hastert should have looked into or had someone look into the situation. That means someone should have asked other pages and former pages whether they had received inappropriate communications. They didn't have to specify Foley, that could have asked it as a general question about anyone associated with their time as a page. From some of what's now coming out, it's a good bet that Hastert would have gotten an earful.

65 posted on 10/03/2006 8:15:02 AM PDT by retMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel

This has been asked by several people on this thread, but I'll repeat it: Please give us the proof that Pelosi had this information.

If true, it's dynamite. But without proof, it just looks silly to keep repeating.


66 posted on 10/03/2006 8:17:29 AM PDT by retMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: SUSSA

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com

numerous references to CREW here on FR.

NOTE: if a MSM or dinosaur media (ie FNC) call EVERYTHING an instant message then they are trying to fan the non-scandal.

Nobody is addressing the issue of homosexuals consistently being sexual predators upon children.


67 posted on 10/03/2006 8:21:29 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: retMD
it's a good bet that Hastert would have gotten an earful

Not a good bet at all. The IM's are causing you to monday morning quarterback and imagine there was more to be dug up. But they are old and dubiously sourced (to say the least). Foley didn't deny them, but what good would that do anyway? Also the pages themselves have not said bad things about Foley, on the contrary, they have said he was ok.

68 posted on 10/03/2006 8:21:54 AM PDT by palmer (Money problems do not come from a lack of money, but from living an excessive, unrealistic lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: palmer

You mean after seeing the e-mails Hastert didn't think of having a private detective vet it out? Haster should have assumed that if he flirted with one, he flirted with others, and Lord knows what he was stupid enough to commit to immortality in e-mail? Jeez, these politicians can crawl up the keister with a microscope on their electoral opponents, but the clearly suggestive e-mails didn't send up a giant red flag that Foley was a land mine just waiting to be stepped on? The blackmail potential, on the e-mails alone, should have been enough incentive for Hastert to find out the full story. He took them at face value instead of realizing that where there's smoke, there's fire.

The worst thing your army can do in battle is give ammunition to the enemy. This isn't just ammunition, this is a Howitzer cannon. Whether or not Hastert et al. had direction knowledge of the IM's, the e-mails alone should have spurred some kind of internal response, and from all appearances, it didn't.


69 posted on 10/03/2006 8:23:19 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever ("My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." (2 Cor. 12:9))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

Thanks. I did not mean to impugn your integrity, but I wrote a letter to the editor of our local newspaper based on your statement and was worried that I might have been duped.


70 posted on 10/03/2006 8:24:02 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Islam is a religion of peace, and Muslims reserve the right to kill anyone who says otherwise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever
You mean after seeing the e-mails Hastert didn't think of having a private detective vet it out?

That's completely ridiculous. Have you read the emails? He asked the kid for his picture, that's as "bad" as they got.

71 posted on 10/03/2006 8:25:18 AM PDT by palmer (Money problems do not come from a lack of money, but from living an excessive, unrealistic lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: no dems
I haven't heard any Republicans condoning the actions of Mark Foley. All the posters on FR have expressed outrage and disgust with his behavior, and I am glad he resigned. However, I think it's time a lot of us took a deep breath and wait until we know the facts before we start shooting ourselves in the foot. As deplorable as Mark Foley's behavior is, the fact that these 3 year old emails and IMS are just now being made public should sound a warning bell for rational folks that this is another "October Surprise" dirty trick by the Democrats. Why are you so quick to castigate Dennis Hastert and I haven't seen you say a word about the actions of Nancy Pelosi and other radical left-wingers! If it is proven that Hastert knew the full contents of these messages, then it will be time to act...but going off on a tangent now only plays directly into the hands of Democrats. I believe it has been reported that Foley sent these emails after the pages left the Page Program, and that does not excuse his actions, but how was Hastert to know about this? I fear some Republicans such as David Bossie have their own agenda for 'jumping the gun' in this case. Sometimes it is better to be quiet until you have your facts before you. A lot of damage can be done by running off at the mouth when you aren't playing with a full deck. Some of us are acting like all Dennis Hastert was required to do was sit in his office and monitor emails! We're in a war and Republican leaders are constantly having to respond to idiotic charges by the less than honorable Democrat leaders and some of the left-wing Republicans, so I can't blame Hastert for delegating duties...that's the job of a leader.

If this was a Dem, we'd all be screaming: "Castrate the pervert"; and you know it!!!!

Guess what?!! No matter how much you yelled, "Castrate the pervert", it would fall on deaf ears! Democrats are not held accountable for their actions; for example, Jim McDermott, Ted Kennedy, Barney Franks, Gerry Studds, and Leaky Leahy to name a few who should have been punished but weren't. Does this excuse Mark Foley? Heck no, but he has resigned and the matter is being investigated....I prefer to wait until I know the facts before I start destroying careers!

72 posted on 10/03/2006 8:25:57 AM PDT by PeskyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: no dems

This is a trap being set by the dems. Dont fall for it. Someone sat on these IMs until October. I want to know who was sitting on them. Was it the page? Or someone the page talked to. At any rate the moment these IMs happened, action should have been taken. I have zero tolerance for anyone that commits or intends to commit crimes against minors.

When the overly freindly e-mails came to light Foley was quietly pulled aside and told to knock it off. Apparently he did not, and I'm glad he is out of there.


73 posted on 10/03/2006 8:27:01 AM PDT by CougarGA7 (This tag line will be commercial free for the remainder of this thread.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: palmer

If a 50 year old man asked your teenage son for his picture, would it alarm you?


74 posted on 10/03/2006 8:27:24 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever ("My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." (2 Cor. 12:9))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Schuck

The reason I am waiting and giving Hastert the benefit of the doubt is because I remember when the first part of the story broke - that just included the e-mails. It was reported that Congressman Foley explained the e-mails by saying the page had contacted his office for a reference (for a job). They had renewed contact (this was AFTER the page had completed his Washington, D.C. stint) and he was just being friendly. SO we don't know what he told the Republican leadership when they confronted him about the e-mails. Obviously - now that we have the IM's - it makes the e-mails look more suspicious.... but hindsight is always that way. I do believe SOMEONE knew this was much more serious - at this point I do not necessarily believe that person was Hastert OR anyone with a R after their name....
we will see.


75 posted on 10/03/2006 8:29:17 AM PDT by Momto2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: no dems

What would be the difference/ They have been "governing like a minority party"
anyway. Maybe from the ashes of these sorry gop leaders in the house and the senate, a new generation of CONSERVATIVE leaders will rise. And I'm not talking about John Boehoir. He must go as well.


76 posted on 10/03/2006 8:29:43 AM PDT by tennmountainman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: palmer
The IM's are causing you to monday morning quarterback and imagine there was more to be dug up.

I would have been very happy had such questions come up with a "no," and it certainly would have insulated the leadership from the circus that's going on now. It would have been straightforward: we asked, we couldn't find any corrorobation, and that's that.

Also the pages themselves have not said bad things about Foley, on the contrary, they have said he was ok.

Check out one example - and I think there are others out there - in the LA Times.

77 posted on 10/03/2006 8:30:00 AM PDT by retMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: musikman

Do we now have to worry that our private IMs are NOT private?

not if you are having benign conversations...


78 posted on 10/03/2006 8:30:12 AM PDT by brwnsuga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

No. You are are monday morning quarterbacking knowing that Foley was a perv, knowing that he sent those obscene IMs.


79 posted on 10/03/2006 8:30:40 AM PDT by palmer (Money problems do not come from a lack of money, but from living an excessive, unrealistic lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: retMD

Well that's new to me. I guess I should not be surprised that some pages are now remembering things that we didn't hear anything about a few weeks ago.


80 posted on 10/03/2006 8:32:34 AM PDT by palmer (Money problems do not come from a lack of money, but from living an excessive, unrealistic lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 141-149 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson