Posted on 10/05/2006 11:50:13 AM PDT by kcvl
Edited on 10/05/2006 1:00:50 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
>XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU OCT 5 2006 2:53:48 ET XXXXX
CLAIM: FILTHY FOLEY ONLINE MESSAGES WERE PAGE PRANK GONE AWRY
**World Exclusive**
**Must Credit the DRUDGE REPORT**
According to two people close to former congressional page Jordan Edmund, the now famous lurid AOL Instant Message exchanges that led to the resignation of Mark Foley were part of an online prank that by mistake got into the hands of enemy political operatives, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal.
According to one Oklahoma source who knows the former page very well, Edmund, a conservative Republican, goaded an unwitting Foley to type embarrassing comments that were then shared with a small group of young Hill politicos. The prank went awry when the saved IM sessions got into the hands of political operatives favorable to Democrats.
The primary source, an ally of Edmund, adamantly proclaims that the former page is not a homosexual. The prank scenario was confirmed by a second associate of Edmund. Both are fearful that their political careers will be affected if they are publicly brought into the matter.
The prank scenario only applies to the Edmund IM sessions and does not necessarily apply to any other exchanges between the former congressman and others.
The news come on the heels that Edmund has hired former Timothy McVeigh attorney, Stephen Jones.
Developing...
My error- I should have included the link so the date would be evident- that's February [2003.]
CREW has been active only since February [2003] , so its profile is still relatively low. Yet Republicans detect a strong Democratic orientation. Sloan, most recently an assistant U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, is a former aide to Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del.; then-Rep. (now Sen.) Charles Schumer, D- N.Y.; and Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich. In addition, CREW's three board members are Mark Penn, President Clinton's former pollster; Daniel Berger, a trial lawyer from Philadelphia and a Clinton fundraiser; and Louis Mayberg, the president of a mutual fund company.------http://www.citizensforethics.org/news/20030719_natljrnl.php via 10 posted on 01/28/2004 10:52:10 AM PST by jimbo123
I think LS was right when it was mentioned we're still missing something, I'm not sure of any of this is along the right track but a theory I'm developing.
The Dems have been fixated on the effect "values voters" played in the 2004 election and the issue of gay marriage being a part of their downfall in 2004. Some of their gay activists were obviously steamed. Upset that some closeted gay Republicans didn't take their side and supported a party whose base was "homophobic, bigotic" etc...according to their mindset. They have been upset these people refused to "out" themselves viewing it as a "sin" in its own right.
Jordan sets Foley up with these IM's. (yes, the obligatory Foley is still sick as he thought it real). Whether on his own or with the DNC's blessing I don't know, though I suspect right now the DNC wasn't initially involved. (Though I think Jordan has his own little side scandel to all this with Foley/Fordham and the Istook campaign.)
Somehow the DNC/MSM gets ahold of the copies of this conversation. Macsmind has captured IM's with friends of Jordan's that suggest he was interested in landing a book deal. Perhaps one of these people he shopped around to was given these IM's and they ended up in the MSM/DNC's hands by this means? Maybe not, but somehow they get ahold of them and I'm not ruling out at some point Jordan became a part of this drama by choice.
They know how the conservative base feels about gay marriage, and some feel about homosexuality. They know these "values voters" are a threat if they turn out to vote in the mid-terms. They know they can't be convinced to vote DEM, they've spent the last couple years trying and failed. And they know the GOP has more "red" areas then they have "blue". In order to takeover the House and the Senate they need to gain ground in "red" districts/states. The only possible way to do that is to depress the GOP base.
When Foley falls into their lap with his IM's, they get in touch with the Executive Director of Crew. They prepare a backstory, such as sending this to the FBI etc...to cover their butts but they leave certain items redacted that would prevent the FBI from having anything to go on in an investigation. They prepare a blog in advance to be the one to break the story, one with very few entries that was obviously set up for this sole purpose, and CREW takes over from there.
I'm not certain how the E-mails fit into this, because that kid and his parents seem to be innocent of any collaboration with anyone. I am assuming Republicans weren't the only ones to know of the E-mails though. Perhaps the E-mails which DID go through Republican hands leading to an admonishment to Foley were just the means for the Dems to introduce into the IM's they had been holding back?
With JUST the IM's the Dems could still play the scandel angle and try to depress evangelical turnout, but coupled with the warning given to Foley by the GOP to leave another former page alone, it sets up a scenario where the DNC can claim there was a coverup?
And this is where Rogers enters into the equasion with his contect to evangelical leaders in an attempts to persuade them call for Hastert's resignation?
That's my impression.
Yep. I think that's it. The E-Mails, while not innocent, in retrospect seem like huge neon lights AFTER you read the IM's leading Dems to be able to make the claim there may be a coverup and the Reps should have known. In a way, the E-Mails and the Reps responses to those E-mails validity smoothed the path for these "prank" IM's to be introduced into the conversation without any questions being raised as to their authenticity or their origin initially.
And this would explain the quick campaign commercial they had against Bachman alledging a coverup only a few days later.
The Reps at the Dems timing were made aware of the IM's, they ousted Foley probably sooner then the Dems thought they would though. The IM's grabbed the sensationalistic headlines and the Dems moved in for the kill by releasing the tamer E-mails the Reps HAD known about.
They they try to stoke the flames of the evangelical right to call for Hastert's resignation and alledge Republicans were trying to cover up for a homosexual that preyed on children.
Indeed.
I'd like to know why the Dems can never let anything go.
Sure, Foley deserves to be gone. It looks like he trolled the page program for possible "partners" once they were of age and that isn't its purpose.
But that's not what bothered the Dems. What bothered the Dems is that in 2004 "values voters" played a significant role in denying them the Presidency and kicking out some of their friends like daschle and they just damn well couldn't get over it. So, Foley or no Foley, it looks like Dem activists were prepared to "out" at least one gay Republican if need be to harm the GOP and "horrify" their voters. because of the E-mail history and the IM's that fell in their lap, Foley was chosen but had he not existed I suspect "The List" was the default option.
Just like they can't get over 2000 and in 2004 they claim DIEBOLD stole the election, here they are trying to relive 2004 and the gay marriage intiatives and take that moral position and use it to sabotage '06.
Oh, and just for the record for the few people that can't yet get it in their dimwitted heads before you even bother to post, no one is defending Foley and we're glad he's gone. What I am NOT happy about is that DEMS knew what he was using the Page system for, held onto that information for months, while they tried to exact vengence for 2004, conspire to throw Denny overboard and take control in '06.
Some things rise above politics. Like national security. Not that the Dems understand that. And a representative trolling the page system to groom possible partners when they come of age is supposed to be above politics! they had a duty to inform Denny, and did not. And that is sick. And those that knew deserve to be punished for it, not allowed to lie about the details or accuse Republicans of a coverup.
Ah... Now it makes sense. I missed the 2004 date in your quoted post.
Thanks for the clarification.
bookmarked for morning
I'm not Jewish, but I fear that scenario too.
Be careful what you wish for (even for a political bluff) - you just might get it.
If that's the case then this story will die. No one will pick it up.
I have been back at my house in Central Texas since June and I have not had the cable recconnected..I was so busy at first I just put it off..My kids cannot believe I don't have cable TV..but I soon realized I did not have the TV news channels on all the time and it was nice! I swear my blood pressure is lower!
I have since bought a new TV for my bedroom and put an old one in my computer,guest room..I turn it on for Fox Sunday morning and that's it! I listen to talk radio sometimes when I am on the computer....and still find the "news breaks" particularly galling lately(ABC). None of them seem to know the difference between the Emails and IMs
Happens all the time.
Let's say Billybob says "you're a poopoo head" to Betty Boo, and then you pick it up and you tell Betty Boo that she's a poopoo head.
See the subtle magic in how you acquired responsibility for those words.
It's a linguistic trick.
Your post had an item about nothing surprises you anymore.
Reminds me of that Dorothy Parker quote about no matter how cynical she is, she just can't keep up.
Everything surprises me. I am in a constant state of disbelief about the things that we discuss, that are on the news, etc.
I think I am now like the person who is always rolling over in his grave,,but not quite dead yet.
I never believed in mylife I would read of people masturbating in the oval office, congressmen sending nasty IM's, people picketing funerals. I mean, I just cannot keep up.
Otherwise I agree with your post. Except for one item, but I don't want to get flamed so I will in the interest of peace keep my tongue quiet!!
Hey I knew that! I just wish there could be something really ovious. I clicked on that link without thinking!
C-Span just reported some kind of list from Wikipedia.
apparently a list of former pages who served in congress who were homosexual.
if the page program is a breeding ground for Roelms brown shirt predators then perhaps it should (gasp! form me) be ended.
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.