FBI Yet to Find Evidence of Foley-Page Sexual Contact

ABC ^ | October 18, 2006 | Brian Ross

[Nathan Zachary]

Yes, having anal sex with Democrats is indeed wrong and he should seek help. Why aren't these ex pages being identified so the public can judge if there was inappropriate behavior on their part? After all, they were obviously "gay" while they were sharing dorm rooms with other pages- before they turned 18.

[edcoil]

This was known at day 3 of this over a week ago. Only the AP implied that pages were under 18.

[rhombus]

It may not be legal.

[Stark_GOP]

Foley resigned.
Studds won reelection and was rewarded by his party with a committee chair. Q: Foley or Studds. Which one had sex with underage pages?

[BenLurkin]

Celebrated Gay Democratic Congressional Child Molester Gerry Studds ....

[Nathan Zachary]

It may be illegal if RAT senators were having sex with them as well.

It may be that the page program is nothing more than a hand picked gay young boy stable these freaks keep close at hand so they don't have to cruise the streets in Boystown late at night...

[The_Victor]

It appears he didn't lie about it under oath either nor did he use the power of his office to obstruct justice.

Not to mention that Foley resigned immediately and the GOP has neither defended nor excused his behavior.

[Red Badger]

Maybe he turned over a new page...........

[Sooth2222]

FBI agents are seeking to interview every male congressional page during the 12 years Foley served in Washington, according to officials and pages who have been interviewed.

"Then we plan to start questioning the female pages," said one senior law enforcement official.

Oh? Is it possible that there are some non-Republican congresscritters who actually had physical sex with underage pages?

[tobyhill]

"In cases where actual sex followed, it was not until the boys were at the legal age of 18."

So Brian Ross is admitting that he started a rumor in expectation that the FBI would investigate. What a partisan hack! I want to know what the probable cause is for the FBI to investigate, because ABC says so? None of the IMs or E-mails I've seen showed any solicitation for sexual contact only some dirty talk. In 2003 the Supreme Court ruled that dirty talk even to a minor is protected free speech as long as there is no solicitation for sex or visual exposure to genital areas. They ruled that parents have the responsibility to monitor what their children are saying on-line, not the government. I can't remember the case but it was an overruling appeal from a lower court that said dirty talk was a form of porn.

[Txsleuth]

Nothing here we didn't already know...

Just another excuse for Brian Ross to keep this story on the front burner..

[Diver Dave]

I understand the Feds may have found some Foley photo albums with some potentially damaging evidence, but so far they've been useless since all the pages are stuck together...

LOL!!! Good one!

[PresidentFelon]

Take your logic a little farther and you really have a dilemna. We all have to ask ourselves this quextion?

If this were a heterosexual man, and we exchanged the male pages for female interns, would this "scandal" have ever been covered. Would the behavior of the congressman be called "flirting" or "predation"? Beause he's gay, and a Republican, of course the media will call him a predator despite the implications for the gay community in general.


PF

[LadyNavyVet]

"So, when is the lamestream media going to admit that despite Foley's perversions, he didn't actually break any laws?"

November 8th.

[lastchance]

I wonder if Foley had admitted he was a homosexual before this sleazeorama broke. Would his emails to underage pages be more tolerable to the MSM. I think the answer would be yes. I am very cynical but think the MSM is not indignant over Foley emailing and instant messaging underage pages but that he concealed his homosexuality.

No doubt if he had admitted he was a homosexual the press would give him a free pass. We would now be reading terms such as Foley " mentor to youth" Foley " pioneer in breaking down intergenerational sex barriers" Foley " bringing confused young men hope over their sexual identity" Foley " Republican willing to buck party's
hypocritical morality". Yeah he would be man of the year.

Foley is a sleaze and deserves contempt and if criminal charges are filed he should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

[Wild Irish Rogue]

No pages were harmed in the manufacturing of this scandal.

The Democrats and the media have been everywhere saying that Foley sodomized children.
Chris Matthews was on the Tonight Show about two weeks ago and widened the net to include all Republicans as molesters.
He told Leno that Republicans in Congress were acting like Catholic priests in the recent church scandal.
Harold Ford said that Republicans in Congress were protecting a " child molester."
And taking money from this child molester's PAC.
I think I've gotten more revolting Spam in my e mail than anything Foley and Edmund sent to each other.
The age of consent in most states and I would wager this was pushed by many Democrat legislatures- is anywhere from 16 to 18.
In Massachussetts, thanks to the Democrats-it's legal for two gays of 18 to " marry."
If Foley was a Democrat, ABC would be asking Jordan Edmund if the couple was registered at Crate and Barrel.
But, when a Republican is involved ,suddenly a man of 18 is now a helpless, wimpering child , a mere baby that must be protected , with no concept of the word No.
Tell that to those 18 year old Marines, soldiers and sailors proudly serving their country.

[Jaded]

His DIM party gave him 'quickiefreebie' on it. All of a sudden it's wrong, go figure. Foley should have held a press conference and cried about being a misunderstood gay American.

[MadIvan]

Maybe he really is just a creep, not a criminal.

He abused his authority and obviously has a thing for "barely legal" teens. He deserves to be kicked out of public life and should never hold a managerial position of any kind again.

But no, he's not a criminal...not now, anyway.

Regards, Ivan

[isthisnickcool]

I don't care much about people in Congress who smoke poles except for that it gives people leverage against them. Since members of Congress can "earmark" money it's not good that someone can blackmail them. So, because some in Congress might be secretly gat we need to outlaw earmarking.

What really pisses me off are parasites like Harry Reid who ripoff the taxpayer to line their own pockets. But what's new about that?

[tobyhill]

The whole initial notion by Brian Ross, ABC and CREW was that Foley committed a crime and not just that he's a weird perv. While I'm glad the perv Foley is gone I hope he sues the hell out of ABC and Brian Ross.