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.
What I and many others are angry about are the sunshine Republicans who are screaming for Hastert's resignation based on what they have read in the media, when it is well known that the Big Media is the Democrat party mouthpiece, and will parrot what they are fed. We want to know where the IMs have been for the last 3 1/2 years, who has known about them, and who DIDN'T inform the House leadership, or the POLICE, if they were so all fired concerned about the welfare of the pages in question.
It's been explained over and over to this poster who just refuses to "get it".
The e-mails were sent from Foley's personal AOL account, and the exchange began within weeks after the page finished his program on Capitol Hill. In one, Foley writes, "did you have fun at your conference…what do you want for your birthday coming up…what stuff do you like to do."
In another Foley writes, "how are you weathering the hurricane…are you safe…send me an email pic of you as well…"
exchange, chain, what's the difference?
And Bill Clinton was serviced by Monica while discussing sending the troops to war. But that was just about sex.
That's easy. Its politics and Hastert shouldn't resign. The most prominent organization calling for his ouster I thought was the Washington Times however.
At least he needs to have been found to be willfully negligent. My guess is no one on either side would have guessed the extent of Foley's wanton depravity. And if Hastert had come out and said "You're fire" a year ago to him could you imagine the uproar from the Gay lobby and the human rights dems?
No chance ... he couldn't say anything unless he had a smoking gun ... if they couldn't fire Clinton for doing the deed, they certainly can't fire Hastert for not knowing much about a deed he had nothing to do with. Of course if they find out he covered up - toast him.
Trying to get to the truth on this is like going through a maze.
There is a double standard with the RATs and looks like their disruptors on here are doing an excellent job of upholding that double standard.
All these guys handwringing makes me chuckle because it is pretty obvious that some are spouting the Dem talking points. When confronted with facts, they keep right on spouting like they are programmed!
I think you're getting three different events confused. Hastert knew ONLY about some E-MAILS that a former page was getting from Foley a few years ago. They were NOT of a sexual nature, and the kid told his parents, and the parents asked Hastert to have Foley stopped sending them. Apparently he did that.
The Instant Messages are entirely different, and NO ONE told Hastert about them. He didn't find out about those until he heard about them on ABC. It is at that point that he had a "come to Jesus" meeting with Foley, Foley resigned, and Hastert immediately wrote a formal request to the Attorney General to open an investigation on whether or not Foley broke the law in contacting the boys by the Internet, AND to find out WHO had these IMs for so long, didn't inform any authorities that young boys might be at risk, and who passed them on to ABC. The thing about Internet Sex is new today, and it's obvious that Hastert didn't know about that either. How would he?
Hastert did everything he was supposed to do. He and the other Republican leaders are not at fault. It is exasperating to see conservative pundits and some of the supposedly conservative media piling on.
"I haven't seen anyone trying to protect Mark Foley."
They might if people keep referring to him as "FFF". Just heard an intern on O'Rielly say that's what they called him. Actually spoke the word "fag" on TV.
Today Foley's lawyer emphatically said: Mark Foley isn't a pedophile, he never molested a child, he never had sex with a page and whoever said he is a pedophile is wrong. And until the FBI can prove Foley had sex with a minor, I will give him the benefit of the doubt.
"Trying to get to the truth on this is like going through a maze."
The truth is very simple. A legally sophisticated man of 52 acted in a sexual manner towards a teen. If he is a teacher we all know exactly how to deal with the issue.
As conservatives we cannot accept that the matter be turned into a political football. The issue is a moral and ethical matter. People who make it political do so at their peril (both sides).
' It is exasperating to see conservative pundits and some of the supposedly conservative media piling on."
My impression from Hastert and full disclosure, I was multitasking during the interview, was that it was the parents who shut down all further investigations.
Not Hastert, the parents.
As more is disclosed of the page's voluntary participation in internet sexual talk with a man old enough to be his father- we can understand why the parents wanted everything to be squelched.
Just hope they got their kid into counseling.
I don't know a single ISP who archives personal emails. While ISPs will back up whatever emails are left on their servers every day, they don't systematically archive every email that goes thru.
Corporate, yes, ISPs no.
Why do I know this ? I run services or consult to a bunch of companies in the ISP business.
OK, I guess I had bad info. Thanks.
Linda Tripp told Monica to NOT clean it and hang on to it because she knew what the Clintons would do to Monica if she didn't have any physical evidence of having 'been with' x42. Linda had already seen what the Clintons had done to other women who had accused him of harassment or worse.
http://gmail.google.com/mail/help/more.html#data
"Some news stories have suggested that Google intends to keep copies of users' email messages even after they've deleted them, or closed their accounts. This is simply not true. Google keeps multiple backup copies of users' emails so that we can recover messages and restore accounts in case of errors or system failure. Even if a message has been deleted or an account is no longer active, messages may remain on our backup systems for some period of time. This is standard practice in the email industry, which Gmail and other major webmail services follow in order to provide a reliable service for users. We will make reasonable efforts to remove deleted information from our systems as quickly as is practical."
to emphasize:
"Even if a message has been deleted or an account is no longer active, messages may remain on our backup systems for some period of time. This is standard practice in the email industry"
so, you have 100% faith in their "reasonable efforts" to remove deleted information?
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.