Posted on 10/03/2006 11:02:07 AM PDT by slowhand520
New Foley Instant Messages; Had Internet Sex While Awaiting House Vote October 03, 2006 1:22 PM
Brian Ross and Maddy Sauer Report:
Former Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL) interrupted a vote on the floor of the House in 2003 to engage in Internet sex with a high school student who had served as a congressional page, according to new Internet instant messages provided to ABC News by former pages.
ABC News now has obtained 52 separate instant message exchanges, which former pages say were sent by Foley, using the screen name Maf54, to two different boys under the age of 18.
This message was dated April 2003, at approximately 7 p.m., according to the message time stamp.
THE BLOTTER RECOMMENDS READER DISCRETION STRONGLY ADVISED: Foley's Exchange with Underage Page Internet Messages Show Foley Sought to Rendezvous with Page Click Here for More of the Brian Ross Home Page Maf54: I miss you Teen: ya me too Maf54: we are still voting Maf54: you miss me too
The exchange continues in which Foley and the teen both appear to describe having sexual orgasms.
Maf54: ok..i better go vote..did you know you would have this effect on me Teen: lol I guessed Teen: ya go vote…I don't want to keep you from doing our job Maf54: can I have a good kiss goodnight Teen: :-* Teen:
The House voted that evening on HR 1559, Emergency War Time supplemental appropriations.
According to another message, Foley also invites the teen and a friend to come to his house near Capitol Hill so they can drink alcohol.
Teen: are you going to be in town over the veterans day weekend Maf54: I may be now that your coming Maf54: who you coming to visit Teen: haha good stuff Teen: umm no one really
Maf54: we will be adjourned ny then Teen: oh good Maf54: by Maf54: then we can have a few drinks Maf54: lol Teen: yes yes ;-) Maf54: your not old enough to drink Teen: shhh… Maf54: ok Teen: that's not what my ID says Teen: lol Maf54: ok Teen: I probably shouldn't be telling you that huh Maf54: we may need to drink at my house so we don't get busted
Read an exclusive excerpt of the actual instant message exchange.
It's AIM. Same as AOL. You can only have one name for both. HE was logged on for about 20 seconds aroun 1:45pm. Then he shut it down...or turned of the visibility option.
HAR!
of course they do....
I agree with all your points, I just don't think it is an issue whether the messages were forged or not. I really don't even want to know what was in the messages. I don't see it being news, but just disgusting details we really don't need to know. I really don't think the democrats sleezy tactics are going to help them. They are the true hypocrits in this.
"Yep, set-up, who saves IM's??????????????????????"
Probably nobody "saves" IMs. But any type of electronic submissions, e-mails, IMs, etc., never go away; they're always lurking somewhere in a server and can be traced to sender/receiver with subpoena.
I said it last night and agree with you 100%. None of my three kids would have been allowed to go to D.C. at 16-17 to be a page. Never would have happened.
I'd sure like to know who saved these messages for 3 years, only to surface them a month before the election.
"I put MAF54 ---Foleys nick on my Buddy List...with an alarm to let me know when he came on."
LOL! You do the same kind of stuff my daughter does. Expect a visit from the FBI. ;)
Seriously, I don't know whether he would have access, or not.
soliciting sex with underage boys is a crime.
Depends. By email or IM yes, in person, no, not if they are above the age of consent in the state the solicitation takes place in.
Having sex with minors is a crime.
Not in D.C. or many other states. In D.C. the age of consent is 16, not 18.
providing alcohol to minors is a crime. True, with minor exceptions.
Sodomy alone is still a crime in most places.
No, it is legal everywhere in the USA. The Supreme Court ruled in 2003 that sodomy is a constitutional right that may not be legislated against.
What is not really being discussed is that while Nancy Pelosi et. all are in high dungeon over this they have altered laws to make what they are screaming about both "legal" and "normal".
I can understand that. The whole situation gives me pause. I have 2 sons (they're adults now) whose computer time was always monitored. Predators exist. I saw it as MY responsibility to keep them safe. But this young man seemed to have a lot of sophistication, which makes me question his age. Of course, we also homeschooled to insure our boys weren't exposed to values contrary to our own and weren't given the opportunity to become oversexualized.
Cindie
Are you asserting that the F.B.I. has been leaking information from their invesitigation???
I don't think IM's are saved on a server anywhere. You can probably select to have IM's automatically saved on your own computer, which is probably what happened. These kids have probably grown up into DUmmies and have sold their old IMs.
I don't think the logs came from AOL. They wouldn't do it unless supoenaed. But if the IMs were sent while logged in as a valid AOL screenname then they are kept as part of the member's account. I used to work for the God forsaken company.
Can ya' all say BACK FIRE?
The Democrats are peaking too early - this will pass as an issue long before November.
If the Republicans are smart they will turn to today’s WSJ.com Op-Ed:
Paging Mr. Hastert
October 3, 2006; Page A26
] Florida Republican Mark Foley’s sexually explicit emails to a Congressional page certainly warranted his resignation from the House, and they may well merit prosecution. But this being five weeks from an election, the GOP House leadership is also being assailed for not having come down more strongly on a gay Congressman for showing a more than friendly interest in underage boys. That’s a different issue altogether.
] At least this seems to be the essence of the Democratic and media charge against Speaker Dennis Hastert, who admits his office was told months ago about a friendly, non-explicit 2005 email exchange between Mr. Foley and another page. In that exchange, Mr. Foley had asked the teenager “how old are you now” and requested “an email pic.”
Yes, Mr. Hastert and his staff should have done more to quarantine Mr. Foley from male pages after the first email came to light. But if that’s the standard, we should all admit we are returning to a rule of conduct that our cultural elite long ago abandoned as intolerant.
Foley's behavior seems to me to indicate guilt...but the continuing inflamatory coverage isn't about Foley it's about discouraging us for November.
I have him on too but he doesnt even have a profile.
I agree, it does not in any way diminish Foley's culpability (and depravity) to ask why these young males were continuing the contact.... especially with the really salacious IMs.
We do have to wonder what some of these pages were up to, whether there was any Demagogue "entrapment" of Foley, etc. (that doesn't excuse anything, but it's relevant to ask how the Demagogues have pursued this matter)..... especially in continuing and then saving IMs (I never heard of anyone saving IMs, so I doubt it's a common practice).
fwiw, when I was 16 years old (back in the mid-70s) the middle-aged father of an acquaintance made a "pass" at me that was a lot less salacious than the IMs, but there was no mistaking what was on his mind. I made certain to make clear instantly that I had no interest and immediately ensured that I would never be alone with this guy again (this was long before IMs, of course, but I would never have continued any IM contact with that guy). I could not imagine having had any continued contact with such a guy trying to seduce a teenager (especially ME) and made sure to stay far away from him from then on.
Unfortunately, it did not occur to me to report him to anyone, never told my parents or anyone else, there was a lot less awareness of such issues in those days (or at least I was rather unaware) and I just knew to stay far away from the guy -- it did not occur to me to try to ensure that he would not be doing the same crap to other teenagers..... alas. Now I don't even know his name (his son was a passing acquaintance, not a friend who I can even remember now) but he'd be in his '80s if he's still alive......
A bj is not sex, but typing at the keyboard is.
What Foley did was outside the bounds of normal behavior but as far as I can tell, it was legal. Disgusting, but legal. The boy was 16, the lowest age of legal consent.
The idea of a 50 yo man and an 18yo girl is just as repulsive to me - Monica and Bill.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A35586-2002Jul20
"Although the major IM services do not archive messages, recipients can choose to save them. And the messages do travel through servers, at different speeds depending upon the time of day and the system's configurations. While the mail may not be officially cached, it is possible to retrieve it at certain moments, like taking snapshots. "In theory, the FBI could monitor IM traffic over AOL," says Stiennon. "In practice, it's a difficult task." "
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.