Congressman quits over sexual harrassment

[Rex Kickass]

It seems as if Republican congressmen knew of this situation as early as last week, this summer, this spring, last year, 2001, 2000.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6100800855.html

 

A Republican congressman knew of disgraced former representative Mark Foley's inappropriate Internet exchanges as far back as 2000 and personally confronted Foley about his communications.

 

A spokeswoman for Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) confirmed yesterday that a former page showed the congressman Internet messages that had made the youth feel uncomfortable with the direction Foley (R-Fla.) was taking their e-mail relationship. Last week, when the Foley matter erupted, a Kolbe staff member suggested to the former page that he take the matter to the clerk of the House, Karen Haas, said Kolbe's press secretary, Korenna Cline.

[EvilMonkey]

It seems as if Republican congressmen knew of this situation as early as last week, this summer, this spring, last year, 2001, 2000.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...6100800855.html

And what more would you have liked Kolb to have done? You seem to be implying that 'they knew and did nothing'. Conmsidering that at that point nothing illegal had been known to be done, there wasn't too much Kolb could have done. Maybe he yelled at him, maybe he simply admonished him to be more carefull. However, since he told the (former) page to go tell all, my guess is that he wasn't nice to Foley. But again, what would you have wanted Kolb to do? Run to the papers? 'Out' him to the papers? At some point, Foley is an adult responsible for his own actions. For someone who hates it when conservatives on here paint with a broad brush, you seem to be using a spray gun trying to get all Republicans here.

[Steff]

Friday night they showed Foley from an interview last year on Dateline praising how they were catching all those "repulsive" internet predators. Oops.

[Balta1701]

And what more would you have liked Kolb to have done? You seem to be implying that 'they knew and did nothing'. Conmsidering that at that point nothing illegal had been known to be done, there wasn't too much Kolb could have done. Maybe he yelled at him, maybe he simply admonished him to be more carefull. However, since he told the (former) page to go tell all, my guess is that he wasn't nice to Foley. But again, what would you have wanted Kolb to do? Run to the papers? 'Out' him to the papers? At some point, Foley is an adult responsible for his own actions. For someone who hates it when conservatives on here paint with a broad brush, you seem to be using a spray gun trying to get all Republicans here.

The same thing Hastert should have done. Take it to the whole committee overseeing the Congressional Page program. Ask them to look into things. Or at least have someone take a few steps to make sure that it didn't go any farther than where it was. Just because taking it public and screaming "Pedophile!" from rooftops wasn't a good option doesn't mean there weren't other things that could have been done behind the scenes to make sure worse things hadn't happened and didn't happen afterwards.

[sox4lifeinPA]

Friday night they showed Foley from an interview last year on Dateline praising how they were catching all those "repulsive" internet predators. Oops.

 

In all fairness...did he say what he wanted to do to them AFTER they were "caught"...

 

maybe he just wanted them for himself???

[EvilMonkey]

The same thing Hastert should have done. Take it to the whole committee overseeing the Congressional Page program. Ask them to look into things. Or at least have someone take a few steps to make sure that it didn't go any farther than where it was. Just because taking it public and screaming "Pedophile!" from rooftops wasn't a good option doesn't mean there weren't other things that could have been done behind the scenes to make sure worse things hadn't happened and didn't happen afterwards.

We all know how well seecrets are kept in Washington, I'm sure that the information would NEVER have gotten out had they gone to the page program directly. Foley is the worst kind of creep, and deserves whatever he gets. While you are on your quest to find out what people knew and when they knew it, how about those on the Democrat side? It sure seems like alot of people there knew at least as much as Hastert, but yet also chose to do nothing. That is, until it was politically advantageous to them. The page that 'leaked' the info worked for a Democrat, the website the ABC guy says he saw was created about 2 days before he saw it. I doubt google even knew it existed at that time. It has also been shown that the blog entries were made up, and the blog paid for anonomously. Souonds like someone on the Dem side wanted to out a gay Republican without seeming to out a gay Republican, so they can still appear to be nice to gays. This is a complicated issue (as every damn thing out there in DC is). What's that phrase I keep hearing from the left, oh yeah, 'Not every thing is black and white'. But wait, the Dems knowledge of this and when they knew it isn't the point, painting all republicans with as broad a brush as we can find is!

[Balta1701]

Ah, finally, someone came out & finally spouted the repeated lies about how it was the Dems' fault for this leaking when it did.

 

First and foremost, yes, CREW had the suggestive emails, along with John Avarosis of Americablog.com, in the summer of this year. CREW forwarded those emails to the FBI and did not publish them. Crew has in fact given the name of the specific FBI Agent they gave the emails to to CNN. The FBI has not yet responded.

 

 

Secondly...

The page that 'leaked' the info worked for a Democrat, the website the ABC guy says he saw was created about 2 days before he saw it. I doubt google even knew it existed at that time. It has also been shown that the blog entries were made up, and the blog paid for anonomously. Souonds like someone on the Dem side wanted to out a gay Republican without seeming to out a gay Republican, so they can still appear to be nice to gays.

 

This of course ignores those damn little facts of how ABC actually got the info.

(ABC Journalist Brian) Ross dismissed suggestions by some Republicans that the news was disseminated as part of a smear campaign against Mr. Foley.

 

“I hate to give up sources, but to the extent that I know the political parties of any of the people who helped us, it would be the same party,” Mr. Ross said, referring to Republicans.

Link.

 

They were passed to a colleague of mine from a source, not someone from a Democratic campaign, a source on the Hill. And when we talked to Foley’s office about those emails, they seemed to know all about them. “It’s no big deal. He is overly friendly. He’s overly engaging. If he’s guilty of anything, that’s all he’s guilty of. He’s very close with the pages. He has worked with the page program for some time.”

 

So we published that story, and then almost immediately we began receiving emails from former pages, some going back as far as five years, who said this is the tip of the iceberg. There is so much more here.

ABC Producer Maddy Sauer.

 

So, 2 different people at ABC say the person who tipped them off was either a Republican or not a member of a Democratic Campaign. End of story.

 

And finally...Given what has been discovered about the guy, are you saying it is a bad thing that his emails came out? Look, the fact is, the Republicans knew about this guy's problems years ago. They may not have known how bad it was, but they clearly had the hint of some things. They could have and should have taken care of this earlier. At least 5 years ago in at least one case. But nothing was done beyond an occasional talking to. The Republicans have known about this for years, and it's the Democrats fault for it coming out, and so we're the bad guys? Wow. Maybe we'd all be better off if the Republicans had just kept ignoring it. I'm sure no more harm would happen in the next 2 years if he kept his seat, right?

 

Finally, one more point. The issue is not outing a gay Republican. The issue is outing a potential child Predator who happens to be a Republican. There is a monstrous difference there.

Edited October 9, 2006 by Balta1701

[EvilMonkey]

Ah, finally, someone came out & finally spouted the repeated lies about how it was the Dems' fault for this leaking when it did.

 

First and foremost, yes, CREW had the suggestive emails, along with John Avarosis of Americablog.com, in the summer of this year. CREW forwarded those emails to the FBI and did not publish them. Crew has in fact given the name of the specific FBI Agent they gave the emails to to CNN. The FBI has not yet responded.

 

 

 

Secondly...

 

This of course ignores those damn little facts of how ABC actually got the info.

Link.

 

ABC Producer Maddy Sauer.

 

So, 2 different people at ABC say the person who tipped them off was either a Republican or not a member of a Democratic Campaign. End of story.

 

And finally...Given what has been discovered about the guy, are you saying it is a bad thing that his emails came out? Look, the fact is, the Republicans knew about this guy's problems years ago. They may not have known how bad it was, but they clearly had the hint of some things. They could have and should have taken care of this earlier. At least 5 years ago in at least one case. But nothing was done beyond an occasional talking to. The Republicans have known about this for years, and it's the Democrats fault for it coming out, and so we're the bad guys? Wow. Maybe we'd all be better off if the Republicans had just kept ignoring it.

 

Finally, one more point. The issue is not outing a gay Republican. The issue is outing a potential child Predator who happens to be a Republican. There is a monstrous difference there.

For the last f***ing time, nothing I am saying excuses anthing that Foley did, or thought of doing. Regardless of party, it is a GOOD thing that he is gone, hopefully for a long time. And I don't care how many people at ABC comne out and say they got it from a Republican source. How hard is it to lie about that? i mean, news organizations have made up stories out of thin air (think rathergate), doctored photos to further an agenda (or just because they were stupid), so why wouldn't they lie about this too? Especially if they really got it from a prominent democrat. The 'blog' that they first appeared on is stopsexpredators.blogspot.com. Here is a breakdown of that fake blog

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2006...foleys-fall.php

Now, I doubt that a Republican staffer set this site up. Or is it all some evil plot gone awry by Karl Rove?

 

The person who exposed Foley did the right thing, but it's starting to look more and more like they did it in the wrong way. This has the signatures of a "political hit," carefully timed and arranged to do the maximum political damage to the Republican party very close to the election. That means that instead of exposing Foley and his deviant ways as soon as they could, the let him continue posing a potential threat to young men until the timing suited the exposer's agenda -- and that is utterly despicable. Had Foley actually committed any overt acts against an underaged person during that time, the exposer would have shared in the moral responsibility for allowing it to happen.

 

So, to sum up, again for those of you who can't comprehend, Foley is a loathsome scumbag, and deserves public scorn and suspicion for the rest of his days. The person who exposed him did the nation a favor by doing so. But if -- IF -- that person sat on the information until such time as suited their own political agenda, then they, too, ought to be held up for public contempt, at LEAST to the level you are trying to put on hastert.

[Balta1701]

But all of the evidence, and I mean ALL of it, shows that this was not a political hit, it was in fact known by a growing group of people before ABC finally published on it.

 

1. The Republicans leadership began to know about the problem as early as 2000. At the very least they knew about them early in 2005. Nothing was done.

 

2. The Saint Petersberg Times and the Miami Herald received copies of emails from Mr. Foley to pages in late November 2005. At least the St. Pete times tried to follow up, but couldn't get the page in question to go on record or allow his name to be released.

 

3. CREW and lefty Blogger John Avarosis received the emails by July of 06. They forwarded the emails to the FBI and took no further action - they did not publish, because they didn't know what they had, and they only had the tip of the iceberg.

 

4. ABC learns about the emails in August of 06, but did not publish until late September, mainly because they were spending their resources covering the 9/11 anniversary. They decided to publish the tip of the iceberg on Friday, and when confronted with the emails, Foley resigned before ABC could even publish them. When ABC published them, the really nasty ones were sent to them quite rapidly.

 

This was not a hit. This was being handed to the press, to the Republican leadership, and to the FBI at the end of 2005 at the very latest. Nothing was done. Had something been done earlier, then the Republicans could have avoided this pre-election mess.

[Steff]

Finally, one more point. The issue is not outing a gay Republican. The issue is outing a potential child Predator who happens to be a Republican. There is a monstrous difference there.

 

 

I do think that everyone on this board is on agreement with that point.

[Texsox]

Let me see if I understand this

 

GOP knew about it for years, did nothing.

FBI knew about it for months/years, did nothing.

Someone may have gone to the Dems, they did something.

 

And we are thinking what the Dems may have done was a bad thing?

[sox4lifeinPA]

Let me see if I understand this

 

GOP knew about it for years, did nothing.

FBI knew about it for months/years, did nothing.

Someone may have gone to the Dems, they did something.

 

And we are thinking what the Dems may have done was a bad thing?

 

 

I think it's the lack of canned spotted dick in their diet.....

[southsider2k5]

But all of the evidence, and I mean ALL of it, shows that this was not a political hit, it was in fact known by a growing group of people before ABC finally published on it.

 

1. The Republicans leadership began to know about the problem as early as 2000. At the very least they knew about them early in 2005. Nothing was done.

 

2. The Saint Petersberg Times and the Miami Herald received copies of emails from Mr. Foley to pages in late November 2005. At least the St. Pete times tried to follow up, but couldn't get the page in question to go on record or allow his name to be released.

 

3. CREW and lefty Blogger John Avarosis received the emails by July of 06. They forwarded the emails to the FBI and took no further action - they did not publish, because they didn't know what they had, and they only had the tip of the iceberg.

 

4. ABC learns about the emails in August of 06, but did not publish until late September, mainly because they were spending their resources covering the 9/11 anniversary. They decided to publish the tip of the iceberg on Friday, and when confronted with the emails, Foley resigned before ABC could even publish them. When ABC published them, the really nasty ones were sent to them quite rapidly.

 

This was not a hit. This was being handed to the press, to the Republican leadership, and to the FBI at the end of 2005 at the very latest. Nothing was done. Had something been done earlier, then the Republicans could have avoided this pre-election mess.

 

Gerry Studds saids "hi"

[EvilMonkey]

Let me see if I understand this

 

GOP knew about it for years, did nothing.

FBI knew about it for months/years, did nothing.

Someone may have gone to the Dems, they did something.

 

And we are thinking what the Dems may have done was a bad thing?

They knew about "it"? They DIDN'T know about the IM's. They knew of some emails that apparently noone thought were bad enough to do anything about. Even CREW and a rabid lefty blogger did nothing except turn them over to the FBI. Your post makes it sound like Hastert and the FBI knew he was telling 17 year olds to take off their boxers. While that may yet be proven to be true, so far, it has not. If it does turn out that Hastert knew about the IM's as well, i will join you in your condemnation. As for the Dems doing wrong, please reread that section of my post.

The person who exposed him did the nation a favor by doing so. But if -- IF -- that person sat on the information until such time as suited their own political agenda, then they, too, ought to be held up for public contempt, at LEAST to the level you are trying to put on hastert.

Please note the word IF.

[Soxy]

They knew about "it"? They DIDN'T know about the IM's. They knew of some emails that apparently noone thought were bad enough to do anything about. Even CREW and a rabid lefty blogger did nothing except turn them over to the FBI. Your post makes it sound like Hastert and the FBI knew he was telling 17 year olds to take off their boxers. While that may yet be proven to be true, so far, it has not. If it does turn out that Hastert knew about the IM's as well, i will join you in your condemnation. As for the Dems doing wrong, please reread that section of my post.

Please note the word IF.

Imagine, if you will, if someone on the dems made this statement about a dem leader in the same situation as Foley. EM would be the first to rip them from here to kingdom come.

[southsideirish71]

I know a 13 year old that's 5'9" and 170lbs. Physical attributes mean nothing where such abuse is concerned.

 

 

And also to your point how many 9 year old girls are starting puberty now due to environmental/steroids in the meat/ issues. There are some pedophiles that are attracted to the pre-pubesiant child and their features, and there are some pedophiles who are attracted to the child like innocence. Both are sick and should be warehoused in some prison or planted in a hole in the back of the prison. We had some pervert who stated because some 10 year old had pubic hair that he really thought she was 18. The only problem with that he was on parole for a child sex crime. As a former member of law enforcement I have seen all sorts of sick and twisted people that took a lot of self control not to glock them right there.

[EvilMonkey]

Imagine, if you will, if someone on the dems made this statement about a dem leader in the same situation as Foley. EM would be the first to rip them from here to kingdom come.

And imagine the moment I did LCR and Balta shouting me down with 'he didn't break any laws', and 'must be a Rove October suprise'. And you know that it would happen. Do you all even read the entire part of what I read? If hastert ignored the IM's, then he should not only resign his leadership post, but should get out of politics altogether. If all he saw were the same emails that a hellova lot of other people saw, then while I question his judgement on that, you should let the people decide if he should stay or go. Foley should be locked up. As a father, I want to kick his ass (I would also want to throw a few at Denny for his judgement, but he would probably squish me!). This is Fitzmas all over again with liberals practically wetting themselves over this situation. Using a pedophile to make political gains. Concentrate on finding out what Foley did. Concentrate on who, on BOTH sides, knew what. But stop making it a political which hunt.

[Balta1701]

That is so freaking mind-blowing that I literally don't have anything left to say.

[Soxy]

That is so freaking mind-blowing that I literally don't have anything left to say.

^^^^^

 

Additionally, LCR TEACHES children and ISN'T even a democrat.

 

And, yeah, just yeah.

[Balta1701]

^^^^^

 

Additionally, LCR TEACHES children and ISN'T even a democrat.

 

And, yeah, just yeah.

I think that's the least of the problems I have with that block of text.

[Rex Kickass]

Gerry Studds saids "hi"

 

The Democrats along with the Republicans voted to censure Gerry Studds. It's not the Democratic party's fault that his district chose to re-elect the scumbag. It's the people in his district's fault.

[southsider2k5]

The Democrats along with the Republicans voted to censure Gerry Studds. It's not the Democratic party's fault that his district chose to re-elect the scumbag. It's the people in his district's fault.

 

Did he caucus with them? Was he on the committees they were involved in? Did they really do everything they could to get him out of a position of power?

[Steff]

Hastert: Anyone who hid page info leaves

ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Writer

 

 

 

WASHINGTON - House Speaker Dennis Hastert said Tuesday he'll dismiss anyone on his staff found to have covered up concerns about ex-Rep. Mark Foley (news, bio, voting record)'s approaches to former pages.

 

Hastert said he huddled with his staff members last week and he believes they acted appropriately in handling information on Foley's conduct. But he also issued them a stern warning: "If they did cover something up, then they should not continue to have their jobs."

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061010/ap_on_...DltBHNlYwM3MTY-

 

 

So he may be resigning afterall...?

[southsider2k5]

Another random thought here.... if it isn't OK to group the radical Islamists as represently all Islam, why is it OK to paint all repubs are being a part of this scandal? Guys like Hastert I understand, but unless Dems are calling the entire party coverup artists and child molesters, this should be affecting anyone except the few people who have been named, right?

[EvilMonkey]

Another random thought here.... if it isn't OK to group the radical Islamists as represently all Islam, why is it OK to paint all repubs are being a part of this scandal? Guys like Hastert I understand, but unless Dems are calling the entire party coverup artists and child molesters, this should be affecting anyone except the few people who have been named, right?