Thread: Rep. Foley

you've made ten posts on this thread so far...and if you continue to keep posting on it, it will never move to the second page--i.e. oblivion.

and just for clarification...who are you telling to

Originally Posted by stroller

Fekk off and get a dose of reality.

Originally Posted by stroller

Billy really mean to thunp Jill? Should he be held responsible?

I dont thik he really did mean to thump her, but thats no excuse...he should be held responsible, Jill is an evil cow though so you can't really blame billy that much

I thought so too, until it was revealed that Billy had a fling, or at least he was seen to be chatting to one of the girls, and apparently, Jill has been known for having a short fuse, the kindergarden nurse of their daughter said.
But should the kindergarden nurse be trusted?
We'll have to investigate this and we'll let you know all about it, while the world keeps revolving, and life in Thailand, Laos, Bulgaria and elsewhere is somewhat different to that of the United States, but we'll never know about this, because it's not important...

This story made me think of OJ Simpson. Do you think he eats out in restaurants? I mean god knows what people do with his food before they serve it to him. I think Foly is in for the same kind of service. Foly is finsihed. I wonder how long did the Democrats strategists know about Foly's behavior?

The St. Petersburg Times newspaper and other newspapers were tipped off about this story a year ago. The Times interviewed the kid so it was not a big secret. The newspaper didn't go with the story because they say the evidence didn't provide enough to work with. They had a kid who didn't want to be identified and who asked a congressional staffer whether it was appropriate for the congressman to ask him for a photograph. The Times editors don't mention whether they interviewed Foly about his emails to the juveniles.

The Buzz: Florida Politics | Tampabay.com - St. Petersburg Times: A Note From the Editors

It makes me wonder when the Democrat strategists were made aware of this story. Both political parties have their assassins who collect dirt on people. Someone shopped it to the newspapers last year and none of them went with a published article. This year 6 weeks before the election it winds up on a bloggers site with Foly's Democrat opponent calling for an investigation. So when did the Democrats know about the more salacious details that the St. Petersburg Times says they never saw until now? The release of the details just before the election is great timing. It would be terrible of the Democrat assassins to have withheld the info in order to optimize its political impact while juveniles were at risk.

Originally Posted by attaboy

I wonder how long did the Democrats strategists know about Foly's behavior?

Originally Posted by attaboy

It makes me wonder when the Democrat strategists were made aware of this story.

you're doing quite a bit of wondering.

well, the democrat member of the page board was never informed of the emails.....i WONDER why that was?

I think the story is interesting because of the irony and hypocrisy of it. The US government followers in their morale crusade can't even follow their own standard of conduct and laws. That's ownage. A lot of noise from the "local" and "international" press on that topic will undoubtfully force us not to ignore the story.

what's needed is an investigation into the cover up perpetrated by the republican leadership.

Originally Posted by raycarey

Originally Posted by attaboy

I wonder how long did the Democrats strategists know about Foly's behavior?

Originally Posted by attaboy

It makes me wonder when the Democrat strategists were made aware of this story.

you're doing quite a bit of wondering.

well, the democrat member of the page board was never informed of the emails.....i WONDER why that was?

Well ray I don't move in those circles.

Originally Posted by stroller

What's so special about the US that they're taking up so much space on this Thai-board?
Should I start a thread on the latest scandal involving a local politician in Bremen? Do you know which country this city is in, ye stupid, egocentric yanks?

Who gives a shit about your decrepit squarrels amongst yourselves?

Because if there were no elections in one month none of it would matter. Nobody would care. As it is now it could threaten the Republican hold on Congress which for the rest of the world has important implications.

If you really dislike the policies of the U.S. government you should hope and pray this decrepit squirrel's problems affects enough votes to change the leadership here.

foley is now claiming that he's an alcoholic...oh, that's why he wanted a 16 year old boy to take off his underwear.

(one page)remembers the speech Mr. Foley gave to the pages in 2002. The genial lawmaker stood on the floor of the House and noted that several pages were weeping as he spoke.“You all have proven without a doubt that you are not only courageous Americans but wonderful young people,” Mr. Foley said on June 6, 2002. “I salute you and I thank you, and I hope you will join me, too, in saluting everyone in the page program that has made this year a resounding, phenomenal learning experience and success for you. God bless you all.”

.....and now, could the male pages please take off their underwear and relax. cool.

Former Pages Describe Foley as Caring Ally - New York Times

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

You seem to be fixated on male pages and their underwear there Ray. Oh, that's right - probably to do with the profession you're in, eh?

in your attempt to distract from the OP, all you've done is indicate that you agree that his behavior was reprehensible. you never disappoint boonie.
so, what do you think of the republican cover up?

"Don't give me any crap about the political correctness of my headline. I was reared in West Hollywood, CA and can tell you as a young blonde athlete of the many encounters I had with homosexuals trying to blow me. Luckily my girlfriend's father was the Chief Commander of the Hollywood Police Station and gave me simple hints how to handle their approaches. One of the simplest was to reply to their standard line "I hear there are a lot of fags in Hollywood" to a hitch hiker like me was by emphatically stating "Yeah I turned one in last night" whereupon the car would screech to a halt and the "fellow" would tell me he wasn't going "my way" anymore. He had to turn. So what do we have now? Representative Tom Foley (R), the Co-Chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus, resigned today with the disclosure of sexually explicit e-mails he sent to a 16 year-old page and the hint that he has a history with other pages as well. Tom wrote the young page to inquire "Do I make you a little horny?" How sick is that? Apparently it was well known in Washington that Foley was light in the shoes. How he got to manage "exploited" children is a mystery; a serious management error by the Republican leadership. If you think about it, it is stranger than fiction. Democrat supporters of gay rights are going to forget their support temporarily, the political advantage is just too delicious."

THE RIGHT SCALE

but what about the cover up?

Why are you more interested in the secondary crime instead of the primary crime ?

Sounds to me like you think the possible cover up is more important than this guy potentially being a paedophile. Is that true ?

he's already been caught.

now it's time to prosecute those that enabled him.

and btw, i'm sure it's only a matter of time before the republicans can round up/coerce a page to claim they got inappropriate emails from a dem.

Originally Posted by raycarey

and btw, i'm sure it's only a matter of time before the republicans can round up/coerce a page to claim they got inappropriate emails from a dem.

At your service ray my boy ...

The House Leadership Handled The Foley Situation Correctly In 2005
Given the proximity of the election, it's not surprising that the Republican House Leadership has been smeared for how they handled the Mark Foley situation, but it is unfair.

Let's delve into this a bit.

Back in 2005, the House Leadership is alerted that Mark Foley has written some "overly friendly" emails to a page, that the page's parents want the emails to stop, and that they don't want to take this any further.

Here are the emails in question.
Now, are these emails a little creepy, inappropriate, "overly friendly," for a Congressman to be sending to a 16 year old page? Yes. But, let's talk about what these emails aren't: they're not sexually explicit or illegal and Foley didn't attempt to set up a meeting.
So, what action do you take if you find out about these emails? Do you refer them to Capitol Hill Police? Why would you? No crime had been committed.
Do you refer them to the ethics committee? Why would you? The emails aren't an ethics breach.
So, what ended up happening?

"(T)he Chairman of the House Page Board and the then Clerk of the House confronted Mr. Foley, demanded he cease all contact with the former page as his parents had requested, and believed they had privately resolved the situation as the parents had requested."

That seems like a totally appropriate way to handle it given the non-sexual nature of the emails and the fact that the parents didn't want it taken any further?

But, what about the sexual instant messages Foley sent to a page? The House Leadership learned about them not in 2005, but last week, just like everyone else, and they reacted appropriately to them:

"Unlike the first communication, the second communication was a set of instant messages that contained sexually explicit statements and were reportedly generated three years ago. Last week, ABC News first reported these sexually explicit instant messages which led to Representative Foley's resignation. These sexually explicit communications warrant a criminal referral in two respects. Initially, since the communications involve interstate communications, there should be a complete investigation and prosecution of any federal laws that have been violated. In addition, since the communications appear to have existed for three years, there should be an investigation into the extent there are persons who knew or had possession of these messages but did not report them to the appropriate authorities. It is important to know who may have had the communications and why they were not given to prosecutors before now.


Therefore, I also request that the Department undertake an investigation into who had specific knowledge of the content of any sexually explicit communications between Mr. Foley and any former or current House pages and what actions such individuals took, if any, to provide them to law enforcement. I request that the scope of your investigation include any and all individuals who may have been aware of this matter-be they Members of Congress, employees of the House of Representatives, or anyone outside the Congress."

So, did the House Leadership handle this issue correctly back in 2005? Yes, they did. Are they handling it right today? Yes, they are.
PS #1: Obviously someone has known about those explicit instant messages for quite a while and timed their release for maximum impact -- and of course, that would have to be a liberal group. So, who's really looking out for the teenage pages? The House Leadership which called for a criminal investigation the moment they found out about them or the liberals who kept those messages private for months in order to play political games with them?

PS #2: The St. Petersburg Times had the same emails that the Republican Leadership did back in 2005. They found them to be so innocuous that they didn't even bother to run a story on them. That's rather significant. If even liberal journalists are looking at these emails and saying, "there's nothing there," that tells you a lot.

Right Wing News (Conservative News and Views)

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

Originally Posted by raycarey

and btw, i'm sure it's only a matter of time before the republicans can round up/coerce a page to claim they got inappropriate emails from a dem.

At your service ray my boy ...

The House Leadership Handled The Foley Situation Correctly In 2005
Given the proximity of the election, it's not surprising that the Republican House Leadership has been smeared for how they handled the Mark Foley situation, but it is unfair.

Let's delve into this a bit.

Back in 2005, the House Leadership is alerted that Mark Foley has written some "overly friendly" emails to a page, that the page's parents want the emails to stop, and that they don't want to take this any further.

Here are the emails in question.
Now, are these emails a little creepy, inappropriate, "overly friendly," for a Congressman to be sending to a 16 year old page? Yes. But, let's talk about what these emails aren't: they're not sexually explicit or illegal and Foley didn't attempt to set up a meeting.
So, what action do you take if you find out about these emails? Do you refer them to Capitol Hill Police? Why would you? No crime had been committed.
Do you refer them to the ethics committee? Why would you? The emails aren't an ethics breach.
So, what ended up happening?

"(T)he Chairman of the House Page Board and the then Clerk of the House confronted Mr. Foley, demanded he cease all contact with the former page as his parents had requested, and believed they had privately resolved the situation as the parents had requested."

That seems like a totally appropriate way to handle it given the non-sexual nature of the emails and the fact that the parents didn't want it taken any further?

But, what about the sexual instant messages Foley sent to a page? The House Leadership learned about them not in 2005, but last week, just like everyone else, and they reacted appropriately to them:

"Unlike the first communication, the second communication was a set of instant messages that contained sexually explicit statements and were reportedly generated three years ago. Last week, ABC News first reported these sexually explicit instant messages which led to Representative Foley's resignation. These sexually explicit communications warrant a criminal referral in two respects. Initially, since the communications involve interstate communications, there should be a complete investigation and prosecution of any federal laws that have been violated. In addition, since the communications appear to have existed for three years, there should be an investigation into the extent there are persons who knew or had possession of these messages but did not report them to the appropriate authorities. It is important to know who may have had the communications and why they were not given to prosecutors before now.

Therefore, I also request that the Department undertake an investigation into who had specific knowledge of the content of any sexually explicit communications between Mr. Foley and any former or current House pages and what actions such individuals took, if any, to provide them to law enforcement. I request that the scope of your investigation include any and all individuals who may have been aware of this matter-be they Members of Congress, employees of the House of Representatives, or anyone outside the Congress."

So, did the House Leadership handle this issue correctly back in 2005? Yes, they did. Are they handling it right today? Yes, they are.
PS #1: Obviously someone has known about those explicit instant messages for quite a while and timed their release for maximum impact -- and of course, that would have to be a liberal group. So, who's really looking out for the teenage pages? The House Leadership which called for a criminal investigation the moment they found out about them or the liberals who kept those messages private for months in order to play political games with them?

PS #2: The St. Petersburg Times had the same emails that the Republican Leadership did back in 2005. They found them to be so innocuous that they didn't even bother to run a story on them. That's rather significant. If even liberal journalists are looking at these emails and saying, "there's nothing there," that tells you a lot.

Right Wing News (Conservative News and Views)

I had to bold print some of your post SK.

My apologies for my posts earliewr in this thread.

I was drunk and losing it.

Carry on...

the first stage is denial

WASHINGTON - Despite a call from a conservative newspaper for his resignation over his handling of a congressional sex scandal, House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., intends to retain his leadership position."House Speaker Dennis Hastert must do the only right thing, and resign his speakership at once," The Washington Times said, in an editorial in which it joined conservative leaders in calling for leadership resignations over the handling of the matter involving ex-Rep Mark Foley, R-Fla.

A written statement from Hastert's office said that wasn't going to happen. "The Speaker has and will lead the Republican conference to another majority in the 110th Congress," the statement said, adding, "Mark Foley has resigned his seat in dishonor, and the criminal investigation of this matter will continue. The Speaker is working every day on ensuring the House is a safe, productive environment for members, staff and all those who are employed by the institution."

Hastert won't resign over Foley scandal - Politics - MSNBC.com

'faux' news had a copy of the emails, but chose not to broadcast the story.

fair and balanced, eh?

Leader of U.S. House defends handling of scandal involving congressman, young former page - iht,america,US Congressman Resigns - Americas - International Herald Tribune