Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ABC ONLINE GLITCH LEADS TO IDENTITY OF FOLEY ACCUSER; FEATURED IM EXCHANGE WAS WITH 18 YEAR OLD
The Drudge Report ^ | 10-04-06 | Drudge

Posted on 10/04/2006 5:12:16 PM PDT by jrooney

A posting of an unredacted instant message sessions between Rep. Mark Foley and a former congressional page has apparently exposed the identity of the now 21 year-old accuser...

ABC RELEASED TRANSCRIPT OF ONE CHAT BETWEEN FOLEY AND A MAN WHO WAS 18 AT THE TIME OF THE INSTANT MESSAGE EXCHANGE.... NETWORK STATED THE MESSAGE WAS TO 'UNDER AGE' TEEN... DEVELOPING...

ABC ONLINE GLITCH LEADS TO IDENTITY OF FOLEY ACCUSER; FEATURED IM EXCHANGE WAS WITH 18 YEAR OLD

(Excerpt) Read more at drudgereport.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 200601; 20061107; 4thestate5thcolumn; abcdisney; aravosis; barbaramikulski; biasmeanslayoffs; billburton; boycottdisney; brianrosssucks; burton; byebyedems; cuespookymusic; disneynews; distortion; drivebymedia; election; enemedia; fakebutaccurate; foley; foleygate; hitandrunjournalism; homosexualactivist; homosexualagenda; johnaravosis; liberalmedia; mediabias; mediajihad; mediawar; mikerogers; mikulski; mslm; msm; phoneylibscandal298; powerghraib; rogers; smearcampaign; targetlist; thailand; trysellingthetruth; waltsrotatingcorpse; yellowjournalism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 701-720721-740741-760 ... 1,401-1,409 next last
To: moose2004
Hey ABC!


721 posted on 10/04/2006 7:15:01 PM PDT by petercooper (It could be worse, it could be raining.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 682 | View Replies]

To: jennyjenny

"Odd. What would the kid be doing that is illegal? This smells."

You're right. The last thing a 17 year old is worried about is doing something illegal. Besides the minor would be guilty of nothing...very stinky indeed.



722 posted on 10/04/2006 7:15:08 PM PDT by traderrob6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 678 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

Now watch the MSM try to dump this story double quick and try and reboot the Woodward fairytale book


723 posted on 10/04/2006 7:15:14 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 643 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

bttt


724 posted on 10/04/2006 7:15:14 PM PDT by Guenevere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 718 | View Replies]

To: jrooney
He's been digging hard. Maybe a little motivated by the extremely vicious attention the libs have been heaping on his sexual persona (which is a little mysterious).

And now he breaks this one. Revenge is so sweet for the Mattster.

I've suggested several times that the 'boy' might be eighteen. So fun to see my lucky guess come true.

And now, what becomes of the Dim's big Foley scandal? A big nothing. Even if Foley did do something with some other underage male, the phoniness of this main charge is what people will remember. And it will cast doubt on anything else Foley is accused of.
725 posted on 10/04/2006 7:15:17 PM PDT by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LowOiL

If that's him, Foley should have resigned. His taste is as bad as Clinton's.


726 posted on 10/04/2006 7:15:26 PM PDT by beaversmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 641 | View Replies]

To: nopardons

Not surpising but amazing. There will be a huge wave that comes crashing back on the donks and ABC for this.


727 posted on 10/04/2006 7:16:35 PM PDT by jrooney ( Hold your cards close.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 718 | View Replies]

To: BlueJ7
[uncorrected text]: "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."

HA! Nice try, ABC-frauds, you can run but you can't hide, your original uncorrected words have been preserved in cyber-space...... clearly ABC was trying to make people believe that Foley was sexually propositioning minors, but from what I've read it may well turn out that the only sexually explicit IMs were to an 18 y.o.

Foley is still scum, as so many here have noted, but the whole hypocritical "protect our children against molestors" theme of the Demagogues and the MSM may have gone down the tubes tonight.
728 posted on 10/04/2006 7:16:37 PM PDT by Enchante (There are 3 kinds of lies: Lies, Damned Lies, and the Drive-By Media)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 700 | View Replies]

To: jrooney
Brian Ross must be soiling his drawers about now.....
729 posted on 10/04/2006 7:16:39 PM PDT by b4its2late (I'm not insensitive, I just don't care.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: BlueJ7

When an investigation does not yield conclusive evidence a media/law enforcement colusion will run a story hoping that people send in new leads. Brian Ross says this happened here.


730 posted on 10/04/2006 7:16:45 PM PDT by ClaireSolt (Have you have gotten mixed up in a mish-masher?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 717 | View Replies]

To: jrooney

Will the President retract his statement? Will the dems and their allies in the media retract or do what they usually do, just drop it?


731 posted on 10/04/2006 7:17:04 PM PDT by Leftism is Mentally Deranged ("Liberalism" is more dangerous to normal civilized people than jihadism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44
I think I understand what you are looking for.

The pages age is currently 21 yrs, 7 months, 11 days. Sources; the pages biography provides birth date. Individual has been found and is 21 + some months old.

The pages IM had the page's birth date of 2/23 as a part of the online name.

This means that the page was 18 on 2/23/2003.

The "bad" IMs were sent by Foley in April of 2003.

Thus the page was 18 years and approximately 2 months old when the "bad" IMs were recieved.

There. I think that is it. I don't think Matt or anyone is attacking the victim. Hope this helps. I gleaned this from about 400 posts. I am going to bed now and let my eyes uncross.

Please pass my thanks on to your son for his service. If you ain't Armored Cav, You Ain't! Unless you are in nuc subs of course. :D)
732 posted on 10/04/2006 7:17:18 PM PDT by Nuc1 (NUC1 Sub pusher SSN 668 (Liberals Aren't Patriots))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 381 | View Replies]

To: jrooney

Nevermind....

733 posted on 10/04/2006 7:17:27 PM PDT by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: George W. Bush

Bingo.


734 posted on 10/04/2006 7:17:30 PM PDT by jrooney ( Hold your cards close.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 725 | View Replies]

To: MOgirl

Oh, I think talk about sitting this one out died the minute the Dems sunk this low.

They would have been better served not to a) infuriate conservatives and b) trash their own base.

Now, game's on and I'm voting straight Republican. Thank the Dems' sleaze for that turnaround in my, and I strongly suspect many, attitude(s).

Oh, and ABC lied huh? Well well...maybe rather & mapes will soon have company.


735 posted on 10/04/2006 7:17:54 PM PDT by Soul Seeker (Kobach: Amnesty is going from an illegal to a legal position, without imposing the original penalty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 714 | View Replies]

To: Leftism is Mentally Deranged

The MSM hasn't caught on yet because they're still running the full-on blitz on Republicans.


736 posted on 10/04/2006 7:18:18 PM PDT by 38special (I mean come'on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 731 | View Replies]

To: riri

ah jees, this almost semlls like a Rove Runner moment. You know what your enemies going to do before he knows what he is going to do. And you use it to your advantage.


737 posted on 10/04/2006 7:18:35 PM PDT by riri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 731 | View Replies]

To: jrooney
Drudge also has noted how ABC Brain Ross called this person "under age".

So is Brian Ross and ABC liable for a malicious libel/slander lawsuit from Foley? I'd love to see it. I don't care about Foley but I'd enjoy seeing the libmedia taught a good lesson about libelling Republicans to drive them from office.
738 posted on 10/04/2006 7:18:37 PM PDT by George W. Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: jrooney

I wish I could agree, and I hope you are right.

I don't believe the ABC confession provides much exculpatory evidence for Foley or the GOP handling of this matter.

Hope I'm wrong and missing something big.


739 posted on 10/04/2006 7:19:10 PM PDT by mwl1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 727 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer
Hmmm...the month of August has Huffington Post saying: House Democrats have been examining many of the Administration's failures affecting our Gulf Coast citizens. As everyone who lives there and has volunteered or visited already knows, in order to rate the Administration's performance, there needs to be a grade lower than "F."

'course that was in contextual reference to "Katrina". Or this one from a linked webpage to Huffington post. The author is taking bets on what "dirty tricks" Republicans have planned.

It's entitled "October Surprise, 2006:

snip:

(5) Nancy Pelosi caught with child porn. Or drugs. Or WMD. Or something. Odds: 250-to-1 House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi is stopped at a TSA checkpoint in an airport and a cursory check of her laptop computer reveals graphic and disgusting child pornography -- apparently filmed (and participated in) by Pelosi herself. Later reports that the TSA screener has a doctorate in Computer Science from M.I.T. are quickly hushed up.

...

OK, the odds are high, but this has been the basis of the Republican party's attempt to "nationalize" the election in their favor: "Nancy Pelosi is dangerous; and America would go to Hell in a handbasket within two weeks of her becoming Speaker of the House." So framing her for some heinous crime isn't completely outside the realm of possibility. It is pretty far-out, though, which is reflected in the odds.

(5a) Widespread GOP smear campaign based on wiretapping Democratic candidates. Odds: 50-to-1 A remarkably well-orchestrated and simultaneous Republican smear campaign across dozens of congressional races, all with information gathered through wiretapping political opponents. Since Congress has basically abdicated all responsibility for wiretapping to the White House, what's to stop them from using such information politically? How the information was gathered would naturally not be made public until after the elections, so the outcome would be a fait accompli.

Oh my, Perhaps it was July that the dems knew....

740 posted on 10/04/2006 7:19:31 PM PDT by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 643 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 701-720721-740741-760 ... 1,401-1,409 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson