CLAIM: FILTHY FOLEY ONLINE MESSAGES WERE PAGE PRANK GONE AWRY

Drudge Report ^ | 10/5/07 | Drudge

[kcvl]

>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...

[jveritas]

I doubt very much that you support the Republican party to start with.

[PhiKapMom]

Channel 9 (CBS affiliate) here in OKC had on the blogger that broke the story. Also had an email message from the blogger that Stephen Jones had contacted him via email. Istook called his site a democrat site but that is false. He was complaining about the DU types coming after him and most of his links are to Republican and/or conservative blogs including Blogs for Bush.

[A Citizen Reporter]

Hot Dog! Nancy Pelosi! Marking this to come back and read

[PhiKapMom]

I think you have nailed it! Keep it up the great work!

[IamConservative]

They are NOT little kids, and although repellant, Foley is not a pedophile, which definition includes an attraction to PRE-adolescent boys.

Technically, the disorder is called "ephebophilia", attraction to post-pubescent adolescents. On the street it is called "chicken hawking." In short, it is the process by which older homosexuals recruit new members to the perversion. That Foley is a homosexual probably means he was "chicken hawked" at one time, which lends some credibility to his clergy abuse claims. Just the "natural order" of the alternative lifestyle.

[justrepublican]

.

[Miss Marple]

Thank you for the information.

My concern is that the democrats keep saying "children" and these kids are not children. It confuses the issue for people who haven't kept up, and it is inherently dishonest.

[Miss Marple]

Margaret Carlson on now faulting the House GOP for not going on a gay witch hunt.

[Smartaleck]

"Those 3 "new" pages have absolutely no way of knowing what was in those IMs or who did them."

Does anyone REALLY know who's really sending what? LOL

The stuff they allege fits with the other e-mails, IM's though?

[IamConservative]

I offered the information as well to illustrate yet more Dem hypocrisy. What Mark Foley did is how men are recruited to become homosexuals. Chicken Hawking is a badge of honor among the homosexuals. Nancy Pelosi is likely blocking a real investigation of the matter because you will likely find Barney Frank and any other homosexuals in the House doing exactly the same thing. They are predators, it is what they do.

[Seattle Conservative]

"I was wondering that too, was there AOL instant messaging back in 1997?"

I was wondering that myself. Looks like AOL had 6M IM users in 1996. Don't know, however, if it allowed the messages to be stored, archived and/or converted to text back then.

History
An early and partial form of messaging systems was implemented on private computer networks such as the PLATO system in the early 1970s. It was also available in the 1970s on the DEC PDP-11 as the "talk" program. Later the UNIX/LINUX "talk" messaging systems were widely used by engineers and academics in the 1980s and 1990s to communicate across the internet. MIT's Project Athena created the first instant messaging tool in 1987 with the graphical Zephyr client. PLATO was the first instant messenger combining presence or list of contacts with the ability to send messages. AOL had 6M subscribers using instant messaging when an Israeli company named Mirabilis introduced ICQ in November 1996 and was first to introduce this concept freely on the Internet. When the number of users of ICQ became a threat to AOL instant messaging service, AOL acquired Mirabilis/ICQ. A few years later AOL/ICQ was awarded two patents from the U.S. patent office. After its introduction, a number of variations of instant messaging have arisen in parallel in many places such as (Yahoo, MSN, Excite, Ubique), each with its own protocol. More secure corporate and commercial oriented solutions for instant messaging were introduced by IBM/(Lotus Sametime) and by others. This has led to users running many instant messaging applications simultaneously to be available on several networks. Multiprotocol clients such as Gaim, Trillian and Miranda reduce the need for independent clients for each protocol.

On single line bulletin board systems (BBS), the system operator (sysop) and the single caller online could typically chat with one another. One's typing appeared in real time for the other person as an instant message equivalent.

Recently, many instant messaging services have begun to offer video conferencing features, Voice Over IP (VoIP) and web conferencing services. Web conferencing services integrate both video conferencing and instant messaging capabilities..

On December 19, 2002, AOL Time Warner announced that ICQ had been issued a United States patent for instant messaging, but they also said that they had no plans on enforcing their patent at the present time.

The term "instant messenger" is a service mark of Time Warner[1] and may not be used in software not affiliated with AOL in the United States. For this reason, the instant messaging client formerly known as GAIM or gAIM is now only to be referred to as Gaim or gaim.

What really characterizes instant messaging from other forms of text messaging applications is the use of "presence" which enables the user of an instant messaging applications to rendez-vous with his/her counterparties and see their status of availability.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant_messaging

[PhiKapMom]

In 1997? I would bet that Congressmen or hardly anyone else was using IM. AOL IM started in 1996 on a test basis according to the web and this guy expects us to believe that a Congressman started using it to send explicit messages in 1997? I don't think so. If Foley is indicative of most of the guys his age that are in politics, they are not very computer savvy now and in 1997 would not have been at all.

[PhiKapMom]

1996 AOL did a test program but no way Foley would have been using it in 1997. Would bet this guy is lying!

[RatsDawg]

Thanks for the info, interesting.

[Howlin]

The stuff they allege fits with the other e-mails, IM's though?

I haven't seen what they wrote, only quotes.

On a web form; for all we know, they copied and pasted.

[PhiKapMom]

Chris Wilson ran a phoney poll during the primary for Istook and push polls against two women in the Congressional race. He is the king of dirty tricksters from everyone I know that knows his work. Here is the exact quote from The Oklahoma last night:

Chris Wilson, of Wilson Research Strategies, said Thursday he recommended last year that Istook hire Chip Englander, a Californian, as campaign manager.

Wilson, whose company serves as consultant to Istook’s campaign, said the campaign manager usually hires his staff.

“Chip is a very well-known campaign manager, one of the best going into this cycle,” said Wilson, who couldn’t recall Thursday which previous campaigns Englander, 25, worked on.

Does that smell or what? Worst run campaign I have ever witnessed.

[Republican Red]

The CREW Emails - Many Discrepencies! Posted by AJStrata on October 6th, 2006

CREW has posted the emails it sent to the FBI (which are redacted like the FBI claims) and there are interesting tidbits for the timeline. These email refer to the 2005 contacts with the Page from Louisianna whose family has asked ther media to stay away.

First off, the emails between the Page and the House Staffer were sent on August 31, 2005! Yes folks, last year. Supposedly this is from the Page to an unknown Staffer (democrat?) who was the intermediary for passing the emails to the news media. So we know the Congressional staffer held these for a year and never told the FBI or House leadership.

Second, the Fax was made on May 29, 2006. This would imply the Fax to CREW was almost a year later than the tip to the staffer. But CREW also held onto these for 2 months until they provided them to the FBI on July 21. Obviously they did not rush these to the FBI like they claimed.

Third, the date on the lower right of the pages containing the August 30th and 31st email exchanges is 10/17/05 - which means this first section was printed out for some purpose (Faxing?) in October - two months after the exchange. This first email runs from pages 1-4 of the Fax sent to CREW (the cover page is missing, which would contain the contactÂ’s information). Then follows the Foley emails themselves through the remaining pages. These have a date of 9/13/05, meaning these pages were printed off a month prior to the other document. These are not one continuous email! These are two printouts from a month apart combined in a single Fax.

Finally, the email from the Page is going to a House email account, meaning the intermediary is definitely in the House.

More as time permits. But clearly the Folely emails were printed out in September and possibly shopped around. They are not attachments to the other email. The first email shows, upper right, number X of 3 pages. While the original emails show number X of some number between 10-19 (only the "1" is visible). These number 9 pages and are not part of the first email, as CREW claims. I see why the FBI was suspicious.

AJ Strata

[Guenevere]

Yes, inherently dishonest....I've heard it too.

But we're talking Democraps....so no surprise here.

Unfortunately the masses of sheeples who only half listen are the ones they're marketing this to.

I wonder, if any Dems have a remaining conscience, how they sleep at night.

[Churchillspirit]

Doesn't seem like Foley was in on the prank. For him it was real.

Idiot!

[PhiKapMom]

BRAVO! Very well stated!