Dream on. This won’t make them vote Democratic, but can make those fed up with the war, with the deficit, and with the Congress in general (75% if I recall) stay home at this latest instance of Washington immorality.
I see the actions of the Republican leadership just another instance of their amazing incuriousity about everything - just like their boss in the White House. So Foley sent interesting email to pages? Should we investigate? Hell no, we might find out something, good God!
That’s their sin - not ignoring a smoking gun, as it were.
Remember these strange bedfellows, and Hastert’s deep, deep concern for the integrity of our cherished Constitution and the balance of powers?
Hold on, hoss. We don’t know the facts yet. The first repurcussion may have been on a teenage boy’s seat.
Check out this video on YouTube, featuring Foley with John Walsh (America’s Most Wanted):
I’m thinkin’ Foley is feelin’ like a long-tailed cat in a room full of rockingchairs right about now. I wonder if Walsh has had anything to say?.
Used to be in the US. But the law covering cartoons and other images that don’t involve any actual kids was struck down.
Yeah, a lot of those Pubbie funnymentalists got no problem with torturing towelheads or using the Constitution as toilet paper, but that gay stuff gets 'em all excited.
Foley has checked into a “fucking skeezebag” rehabilitation facility. Oops, wait, that’s not true–it’s just an alcoholism treatment center. Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t every single goddamn Congressperson excepting the ones from Utah an alcoholic? Isn’t that just part of being on Capitol Hill? I thought there was a Schoolhouse Rock song about that.
Lame lame lame. But funny, too, how checking into an alcohol treatment center seems to be the modern way for a public figure to show penance: it both acknowledges and denies responsibility.
On the other hand, Hastert has called for a Justice Department investigation of how other congressfolks responded to Foley’s actions. Kudos, Hastert! This is exactly what the Republican leadership ought to be doing, and while I’m not going to give him kudos for anything else so far, I’ll commend him for doing the right thing here.
Daniel
It certainly wouldn’t be the first time an ostensibly straight man has tried to blame alcohol for his “inexplicable” homosexual interest.
“Dude, I’m SO drunk…could you come over to my office and take some messages?”
Seconded. And if anyone had knowledge of a crime being committed and did not report it, they should have to answer for it.
Yeah, too bad he didn’t do that a year (or more) ago when he first heard about it.
I have to wonder if one of those people is Hastert, or someone he knows and was hoping to protect. What’s the relationship presently between the watchers and the watched?
My recollection of the Jefferson affair makes me ponder anew the question of why these rubber-stamp Republicans suddenly showed such an interest in protecting the integrity of our cherished separation of powers. Jefferson had already been all-but nailed at that point, and the FBI was performing, despite the lack of precedent, a perfectly legal and literally warranted search of a Congressional office. The perp. was a staunch Democrat to boot. The claims by Hastert and others that the FBI’s search was unconstitutional struck many of us here as absurd on the face of it, with all kinds of ridiculous implications, and the courts rather summarily agreed. This public idiocy for the sake of a minority Democrat (members of Jefferson’s own party weren’t all that supportive, as I recall), and in anything but a hostile environment between the Republican-dominated Legislative and Executive branches, perhaps makes more sense when one considers the timing. How long before the Jefferson flap did Hastert get wind of Foley’s extra-friendly communications with the pages?
Starting with Hastert.
Exactly how? The FBI wasn’t interested at that time in any offices or records but Jefferson’s. Do you think the Republicans were afraid the FBI would stumble across naked pages or something? Or that Hastert was throwing up this smokescreen in expectation of the Foley matter coming out? This makes little sense to me.
-
From what I have seen thus far, it’s not clear to me that Foley’s conduct crossed the line into criminal. However, I readily believe that if these e-mails have been made public, there are likely other e-mails that haven’t. Reagrdless, Foley’s conduct has clearly crossed the line into “inappropriate sleazebag” and he should have resigned as he did.
-
If Denny Hastert had credible information about Foley earlier, he should have forced Foley out at that time. If he did not do so, then Hastert himself is guilty of an alarming breach, and should AT THE LEAST resign his leadership post, if not his own seat.
[QUOTE=Left Hand of DorknessOn the other hand, Hastert has called for a Justice Department investigation of how other congressfolks responded to Foley’s actions. Kudos, Hastert! This is exactly what the Republican leadership ought to be doing, and while I’m not going to give him kudos for anything else so far, I’ll commend him for doing the right thing here.[/QUOTE]
Sorry, Lilly Tomlin. I can’t keep up.
I’m reading in other sources that Hastert’s call for an investigation may well be directed at ABC’s news source for the IMs: he’s hoping to find out that a Democrat forwarded them to the media and thereby drag a Democrat down into the muck, as if bringing public attention to a schmuck is equally disgraceful to covering up a schmuck.
I don’t know whether this is true, but if it is, kudos retracted, Mr. Hastert!
Daniel
The latter. Why should Hastert care about Jefferson? Simple answer: No reason. More complex answer: Jefferson himself had nothing to do with it. The true concern was the precedent set, and the pressing, though likely unattainable, desire to keep the FBI out of Congressional offices unless authorized by Congress. Give congresscritters time to “tidy up”, at the very least, or, optimistically, keep investigators from the Exec. branch out entirely, and have only the Capitol Police snooping around.
First of all ,House pages are minors: as such, they are under the custody of congress. That means that 9to me) if a member of congress decides to seduce one of them, then the whole congress is responsible.
Second; if the representatives emails crossed stste lines 9via a remote server0, then a Federal crime may have been committed-call in the FBI!
Third: Foley’ (alleged) alcoholism will NOT exempt him from prosecution.
I would not be surprised at a MAJOR 9and very embarrassing) lawsuit against the congress. people like Ted Kennedy ought to be trembling in his shoes :o
I wonder the same. As pointed out in the related thread , the Adam Walsh Act may have made things very difficult for Foley:
From here (and bolding mine). If the age of consent is 16, maybe the status of a “minor” isn’t a problem, and intent is a difficult thing to prove, I suppose. I’ve got no feel for how it might play out in a criminal proceding based only on the available evidence. I think probably no criminal offenses here, though he was damn close. New evidence could change that pretty easily, though. As Rep. Foley said himself: