Posted on 10/04/2006 5:12:16 PM PDT by jrooney
A posting of an unredacted instant message sessions between Rep. Mark Foley and a former congressional page has apparently exposed the identity of the now 21 year-old accuser...
ABC RELEASED TRANSCRIPT OF ONE CHAT BETWEEN FOLEY AND A MAN WHO WAS 18 AT THE TIME OF THE INSTANT MESSAGE EXCHANGE.... NETWORK STATED THE MESSAGE WAS TO 'UNDER AGE' TEEN... DEVELOPING...
ABC ONLINE GLITCH LEADS TO IDENTITY OF FOLEY ACCUSER; FEATURED IM EXCHANGE WAS WITH 18 YEAR OLD
(Excerpt) Read more at drudgereport.com ...
Yes i saw that. I think of a Laura Bush when I see the 0 as a slender image and a Hillary Clinton when I see the O as a frumpy image.
Nonsense. Such unsupported generalities are meaningless. In 1995, the Reps took control of the House for the first time in 40 years. Many of the Contract with America objectives were accomplished including welfare reform. During the period 1933-1995, the Congress was essentially controlled by one party [Dem} and in most instances, by huge majorities. Although you may yearn for the days when the Reps were the minority party, I don't. During those days, it mattered little whether the GOP "gave in" or not. We were irrelevant as a party.
We are going through The Great Society Part 2 and GWB is leading the charge. I expect more out of the GOP. If they will not do their job I'll vote for an Independent who will not a DEM but an Independent.
And the result will be another Clinton similar to 1992 and 1996 when Perot ran. We are in a two party system. Independent and third party candidates don't win. I will take the Rep candidate every time.
During the days of the Great Society [1961-1969], the Dems overwhelmingly controlled the House and Senate and held the WH:
87th Congress (1961-63) - Senate [64 Dem - 36 Rep]; House [262 Dem - 175 Rep]
88th Congress (1963-65) - Senate [67 Dem - 33 Rep]; House [258 Dem - 176 Rep]
89th Congress (1965-67) - Senate [68 Dem - 32 Rep]; House [295 Dem - 140 Rep]
90th Congress (1967-69) - Senate [64 Dem - 36 Rep]; House [248 Dem - 187 Rep]
Now this is what I call control of the government, not the puny, razor thin majorities the Reps currently hold. Comparing today with the days of the Great Society is sheer baloney.
It seems that Wolf Blitzer has suddenly got ten years younger. The lightness, the buoyance in the mans voice. Wolf is absolutely over the moon, as an dispassionate reporter of course.
Quickly cutting to one Michael Ware. The Australian chap on the Middle East. At one time Ware sounded like the late Steve Irwin, shouting about "American boys dying".
The Ware went back to moderate Australian accents. Tonight, on the same subject. He is back to pure Irwin by accent.
Something gives. Steady as she goes will do it.
You sir are a much braver man than I. Fortunately my spouse is conservative, and I can always leave the room to watch something she may not want to. :) You have my respect.
Which means she was also 20 in 1995, unless her birth is on January 1.
That would make her 19/20 in 1994.
In any event she was a young intern and he was a much older man in the highest position of power and trust.
Not any more at stake than in the 1850's 1860's when the Whigs we fired. One of the two of the GOP or DEMs parties is gonna have to go and a new conservative party replace one of the two or this nation doesn't have long to go.
Don't know if you saw this latest thread about Jordan Edmund. Does an innocent person hire defense attorney Stephen Jones?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1713970/posts?q=1&&page=493#493
"The exchange occured in the Fall during an election (you don't have elections in the early Spring.)"
A lot of primary elections happen in the spring.
"Please, I am getting old. Spell it out for me. How can you say he was older than 18 when he did the IMs."
OK. His 18th birthday was Feb 2003. The IMs were April 2003. The IMs were 2 months after he turned 18.
The IM's.
Simply disagree; today's world offers far greater opportunities for regret; all of which are embedded in every threat our Country faces today. Today, it is not just a matter of our 'freedom to choose'; but the 'future unfolding' from the choices' we make.
Here it is a day and a half later.
I have yet to hear one mention of this story.
Did anyone else see something I missed?
At least this gives some legitimacy to his entering 'rehab'. . .you know. . .'drunk' but no one ever having seen him. . .now; apparently; someone has.
The GOP leadership kicked Foley because his action were contrary to the moral values of the party.
The Dems dumped Leiberman because his morality and integrity were at odds with the New Democrats."]
. . .the same. ..but not the same. . .both dumped - but no moral equivalency in decision .i.e.
The Repubs were 'right' to dump Foley. . .the Dems were 'wrong' to dump Leiberman. . .
Or. ..we could just note that fall taken by Leieberman; was shorter than the one Foley took. . .;^)
La Cage aux Foley
Thanks for the ping - yes, I thought it was rather remarkable than any 21 year old could be "hiring" a top flight criminal defense attorney for this matter. Where is the money coming from and WHY does Edmund need such criminal defense talent? Blackmail activities against Foley or merely gross violations of personal privacy laws, AOL user agreements, etc.??
Fox News. . .from I have seen; which is not 'all'; but it appears that only a few like Hannity are 'going there'. . Shep mentioned it. . .Seems Brit alluded to it. . .but seems like the majoritiy of the reporting' sounds as if this story is still on the same loop that began earlier in the week; post breaking of this story.
It is more than frustrating. . .and reminds me too much of the 'Plame'/flame reporting. . .
At this rate; we will have the Election and maybe a year - or two - from now. . .there will be a a quiet but damning report on the Demrat contribution here.
Snicker. :D)
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.