Posted on 10/04/2006 7:11:56 PM PDT by SolidSupplySide
And that never happens, right?
True Foley is a scumbag and should have been gone well before this. And I think that the Republicans need to focus on the other issues. But if this turns out to be nothing more than sexually explicit instant messages between two adults, then I think that it needs to be presented vigorously, as nothing more than just another political ploy by the Left. Had we ignored Rathergate (another Democrat political ploy), we might just be watching John Kerry march out to "Hail to the Chief" and not Dubya.
Yep, unlike Farah, Bossie, Weyrich, WashTimes, Boehner, etc
And we are to believe CBS because ...?
Nah, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the Page was playing with Foley, leading him on, making a fool of him, laughing at the guy. The Page wasn't a vulnerable young kid, he was a sophisticated young man, who grew up in California, Hawaii and a few other places. There were IM's on the web from him before he even took the job, making fun of Foley.
Are you incapable of reading prior threads? No member of Congress, House, or even the president can order or ask the FBI to stop an investigation. Where have you been?
If you don't apologize for your remarks re the emails, you have outed your self as a troll, who should be removed from Free Republic.
If you apologize, you will admit to just being stupid in your constant history of hating Republicans and our President.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1713972/posts
Welcome to the Internet, A Tutorial for Reporters - The Old Media is older than we thought.
National Review Online ^ | October 04, 2006 | Stephen Spruiell
Posted on 10/04/2006 8:51:27 PM PDT by neverdem
October 04, 2006, 5:47 a.m.
Welcome to the Internet, A Tutorial for Reporters
The Old Media is older than we thought.
By Stephen Spruiell
The Mark Foley scandal has revealed something deeply troubling about the state of our news media: In the year 2006, most reporters are still either unable or unwilling to distinguish between e-mails and instant messages. And in this story, that’s a crucial difference. The e-mails Mark Foley sent to a former male page give off a creepy old man vibe, but don’t cross the line into sex-offender territory. The instant messages he sent to former pages, on the other hand, ooze slime from the monitor. (Note to reporters: That’s the thing you’re looking at right now.)
The distinction is important because of the debate that has erupted over Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert’s awareness of Foley’s conduct. Republican Congressional Campaign Committee Chair Tom Reynolds told reporters that he informed Hastert in 2005 that Foley had sent some e-mails to a former male page that made the page feel uncomfortable. The page had forwarded the e-mails to a congressional staffer, adding that they were “sick sick sick.”
These e-mails were creepy, but not sexually explicit. In them, Foley asks the page how old he is and requests a picture of him. When brought to his attention, these e-mails should have prompted a more thorough response from Hastert. (Only one of the three members of the congressional-page board was notified, and Foley was told to stop e-mailing the page.) But the e-mails are a far cry from the graphically sexual instant messages that ABC News revealed on September 29.
Nevertheless, almost every major news organization conflated the e-mails and instant messages in its initial reporting on the story, and some continue to get the story wrong. There are too many examples to list — using Nexis and Google, I found instant messages mislabeled as e-mails in stories run by the South Florida Sun-Sentinel, The Palm Beach Post, The Washington Post, CNN, and USA Today, among others. But for the purposes of illustration, I’ll pick on the October 2 edition of FNC’s Special Report, when correspondent Major Garrett reported:
GARRETT: Hastert acknowledged that no formal investigation occurred and that no professionals were brought in to evaluate the potential seriousness of Foley's overly friendly e-mails to a 16-year-old boy employed by the House.
So far, so good. Garrett describes the e-mails as “overly friendly,” which they were, and describes the steps Hastert should have taken when they were brought to his attention. But then he said:
The sexually explicit e-mails that have surfaced so far dealt with contacts Foley had with a page who had graduated from the program. Hastert called them vile. Many cannot be broadcast.
There were no “sexually explicit e-mails” that we know of — only instant messages. But to make matters worse, Garrett adds:
In one, Foley, writing under his personal e-mail address, MAF54, said, “How my favorite young stud doing?” The boy says he starts lacrosse soon. Foley writes, “Love to watch that, those great legs running.”
MAF54 isn’t a “personal e-mail address.” It’s a screen name, as anyone who has used AOL Instant Messenger since it came out in 1997 already knows. I’m obviously not accusing Fox News of being biased against Republicans — laziness can be both fair and balanced. The sad fact of the matter in this case, however, is that the media’s laziness is helping the Democrats disseminate their talking points.
Last Monday the National Journal’s Hotline blog explored these talking points in a post titled, “Foley: The Democratic Playbook.” Tops on the list?
1. Pay no heed to the distinction between the e-mails and IMs. There's no evidence (yet) that any Republican leaders knew about Foley's cybersex IMs. There's plenty of evidence that they knew how uncomfortable the "overly friendly" e-mails made at least one page. So the Dems will press the GOP on what they knew about the former and will constantly, in their press releases, refer to the "GOP's knowledge of the sexually explicit e-mails."
They’ll get away with it too, so long as the “old media” keeps ignoring the difference.
I sympathize with reporters who have to explain complicated stories in a small amount of space or time. But seriously: How hard is it to explain the difference between an e-mail and an IM?
— Stephen Sprueill reports on the media for National Review Online's Media Blog.
"Although this is worthy of investigation, it in no way exonerates the GOP leadership for its lack of action when the leadership became aware of the e-mails."
Now for more reality about the IM's/instant messages not e-mails:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1714161/posts
Foley IMs were with an 18 year old page
Drudge Report ^ | October 5, 2006 | Drudegereport
Posted on 10/05/2006 7:04:12 AM PDT by Courdeleon02
FAMOUS IM EXCHANGE WAS WITH 18 YEAR OLD
Wed Oct 04 2006 20:32:06 ET
A posting on ABCNEWS.COM of an unredacted instant message sessions between Rep. Mark Foley and a former congressional page has exposed the identity of the now 21 year-old accuser.
The website PASSIONATE AMERICA detailed the startling exposure late Wednesday.
ABCNEWS said in a statement: "We go to great lengths to prevent the names of alleged sex crime victims from being revealed. On Friday there was a very brief technical glitch on our site which was overridden immediately. It is possible that during that very brief interval a screen name could have been captured. Reviews of the site since then show no unredacted screen names."
[The PASSIONATE AMERICA webmaster tells the OKLAHOMAN that "he stumbled onto the former page's AOL screen name when looking at transcripts of the instant messages on ABC's Web site Saturday. He said he typed a slightly-different Web address into his browser and found a version of the transcript with the screen name. He claims the AOL name of the young man was still on ABCNEWS.COM before he posted his story on Wednesday.]
SEX CHAT WAS WITH 18 YEAR OLD
On Tuesday ABC news released a high-impact instant message exchange between Foley and, as ABC explained, a young man "under the age of 18."
ABC headlined the story: "New Foley Instant Messages; Had Internet Sex While Awaiting House Vote"
But upon reviewing the records, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned, the young man was in fact over the age of 18 at the time of the exchange.
A network source explains, messages with the young man and disgraced former Congressman Foley took place before and after the 18th birthday.
So are you saying that Hastert was right for not investigating the emails? Would you have been upset if he had?
I think Hastert had an obligation to investigate the emails.
Those who defend Hastert for doing nothing would defend Hastert if he did do something. The guiding principle of those people is "Whatever Hastert did is right." I don't see any morality in that.
I'm saying loud and clear the posters on this board who want to railroad Hastert on this bs, are not republicans.
They are electronic brownshirted moles, who probably get paid for posts and replies like yours.
They are no different than the zomby trolls, who wanted GW head for their lies about Plame.
Your "logic" escapes me. Who said that Congress can order the FBI to stop an investigation? CBS seems to be saying the FBI didn't investigate on their own accord after Hastert said he'd take care of it. After the beating the FBI took by Hastert over the Jefferson office search, maybe the FBI was a little gunshy.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1714403/posts
CLAIM: FILTHY FOLEY ONLINE MESSAGES WERE PAGE PRANK GONE AWRY
http://www.drudgereport.com/ ^
Posted on 10/05/2006 11:50:13 AM PDT by kcvl
Edited on 10/05/2006 12:10:43 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
>XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU OCT 5 2006 2:53:48 ET XXXXX
CLAIM: FILTHY FOLEY ONLINE MESSAGES WERE PAGE PRANK GONE AWRY
**World Exclusive**
**Must Credit the DRUDGE REPORT**
According to two people close to former congressional page Jordan Edmund, the now famous lurid AOL Instant Message exchanges that led to the resignation of Mark Foley were part of an online prank that by mistake got into the hands of enemy political operatives, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal.
According to one Oklahoma source who knows the former page very well, Edmund, a conservative Republican, goaded Foley to type embarrassing comments that were then shared with a small group of young Hill politicos. The prank went awry when the saved IM sessions got into the hands of political operatives favorable to Democrats. This source, an ally of Edmund, also adamantly proclaims that the former page is not a homosexual. The prank scenario was confirmed by a second associate of Edmund.
The news come on the heels that former FBI Chief Louis Freeh has been named to investigate the mess.
Developing...
The screams you will be hearing are scumbags like you who will be trying to outrun their 50# Blivets fired at Denny Hasert, on their way back to them. What a vile and rotten poster you are.
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.