[conservative in nyc]

But IF the pages were above the age of consent, and IF they were yanking his chain (in a manner of speaking) is there really a justification to be on a headlong search for some way to prosecute him?

Whatever the law says, the law says. If there's a law that applies to former Congressman Foley's disgusting IMs sent to 17 year olds (and yes, there was at least one sexually explicit IM exchange sent before a page turned 18) AFTER all the facts are investigated, then it should be applied. If there's no such law, the former Congressman is a disgrace but not a criminal.

Just because something is legal doesn't necessarily make it right.

[old republic]

A state is going to prosecute him? In order to do that wouldn't the Congressman have to be in the jurisdiction of the state to be tried for breaking the state law? Sounds like communication over state lines is more prone to be interstate commerce. Also if the the Congressman did this in D.C wouldn't he fall under D.C. law and not the law of another state? Does anyone know where the Congressman did the deed of which he is supposed to be prosecuted in another state?

[VRWCtaz]

"Just because something is legal doesn't necessarily make it right."

And just because something is disgusting doesn't necessarily make it illegal. I agree that we need all the facts investigated. Unfortunately, that's a rather long process and we live in an instant world.