News Did Foley's Resignation Reveal Hypocrisy in Congress?

[Ivan Seeking]

Now there are suggestions of a cover-up at the FBI

The watchdog group that first provided the FBI with suspicious e-mails from then-Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) said yesterday that FBI and Justice Department officials are attempting to cover up their inaction in the case by making false claims about the group.

Law enforcement officials said the allegations by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) are without merit, and they stood by allegations that the group had refused to provide some information to the FBI.

...Melanie Sloan, CREW's executive director, said copies of the original e-mails she sent to an FBI agent show those assertions to be wrong. Sloan said the agent called to confirm receipt of the e-mails and to ask if one of the parties was Foley.

Sloan said the group sent unedited e-mails to the FBI because "we wanted them to commence an investigation. We're sort of outraged that they're saying anything differently." The group has asked Fine's office to look into the FBI's assertions. [continued

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/05/AR2006100501657.html

 

[Astronuc]

Hastert Vows to Overcome Scandal
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/06/washington/06hastert.html

WASHINGTON, Oct. 5 — J. Dennis Hastert, who was installed as House speaker eight years ago through backroom maneuvering in a moment of crisis for his party, has no distinct power base in Congress, not much of a national reputation and, in an age of television politics, little polish in front of the camera.

But Mr. Hastert has survived and survived to become the longest-serving Republican speaker. And on Thursday, standing outside his district office in Batavia, Ill., he made it clear that he did not intend to become a casualty of the Mark Foley scandal, saying he expected to win re-election to his seat and run for speaker again when the new Congress convenes in January.

Mr. Hastert made his statement soon after the leaders of the House ethics committee promised a vigorous investigation into the handling of the Foley case, approved dozens of subpoenas and said they expected to finish their work in weeks.

Mr. Foley, a Florida Republican, resigned from the House last Friday after being confronted by ABC News with sexually explicit messages he had sent to teenage pages.

With both parties still trying to adapt to the fallout from the case with less than five weeks until Election Day, Mr. Hastert moved to squelch speculation that he would step down in response to suggestions that he and his staff had failed to heed warning signs about Mr. Foley.

Without acknowledging any shortcomings by himself or his aides, Mr. Hastert said he took responsibility for the matter. But he seemed to concede that leaders in times of crisis could sometimes fall victim to perceptions as much as to any wrongdoing or bad judgments on their part.

 

[Astronuc]

In Illinois, Hastert's Supporters Uneasy with Scandal
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6196746

All Things Considered, October 4, 2006 · In Washington, House Speaker Dennis Hastert is fending off questions about his handling of the inappropriate e-mails sent from a congressman to a page. In Hastert's home district, many voters who say they support Hastert also say they're bothered by the story.

Hastert's Democratic challenger is trying to capitalize on the scandal; Hastert returned Tuesday night to his district in Illinois.

Well, Hastert maintains that he will stay as Speaker of the House for the moment.

Meanwhile - House Opening Formal Investigation into Foley Case
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6208203

 

[Ivan Seeking]

My sense of things is that there is no way for the R leadership to justify not acting aggressively at the first sign of a problem here. The "values" balloon has burst.

 

[Astronuc]

My sense of things is that there is no way for the R leadership to justify not acting aggressively at the first sign of a problem here. The "values" balloon has burst.

Or "values" façade, as the case may be, has fallen away.

 

[arildno]

Well, I've looked at this story on and off, and I really find the Reps have been too gleefullly criticized by the opposition. I don't think the Democrats would have fared one bit better, nor do I think any party over here in Norway would have dealt with such a case in a less clumsy way than the US Reps have done.

They are people after all, they do not have the competence to suddenly switch their image of Foley from that of a friend and colleague, to that of a predator.

 

[selfAdjoint]

Well, I've looked at this story on and off, and I really find the Reps have been too gleefullly criticized by the opposition. I don't think the Democrats would have fared one bit better, nor do I think any party over here in Norway would have dealt with such a case in a less clumsy way than the US Reps have done.

Why "too" gleeful? An "October Surprise" that hurts their opponent is what every politician dreams of. And of course you're right that IF the Dems had been in the same position, they wouldn't have behaved any better (but note that this scandal is going to sensitize politicians to the issue for a generation). But that's hypothetical, and when said by a Republican is perceived as whining. It's election time in America!

They are people after all, they do not have the competence to suddenly switch their image of Foley from that of a friend and colleague, to that of a predator.

On the contrary it looks like everybody is cutting and running in the opposite direction as fast as they can. Haster looks like being deserted too.

 

[arildno]

Now they have entered the predictable panic mode.
What I was referring to was their squamishness, their inability to take decisive action themselves, and their lack of strength to disclose this case themselves (and thereby, if you like, remain in charge).

As I said, I think there are very few politicians, or for that mattter other people, who have the requisite strengths to do such a thing when they stumble upon a case like this. Instead, they fumble about, get anxious and in distress, don't know what to do, with the result that others disclose it for them. It is very human, after all.


In particular, one cannot use this case as evidence that Republicans are, somehow, more morally flawed than others. In order to show that, one should look elsewhere.

 

[Astronuc]

Foley Story Wasn't Reported, Until It Was
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6211216

by David Folkenflik

All Things Considered, October 6, 2006 · Months ago, several major media outlets learned about troubling e-mails Rep. Mark Foley had sent to former pages -- but they didn't feel they had enough information to go public with the story. Brian Ross of ABC News got the same information back in August -- but he found a way to crack the scandal open.

Reporters and editors at Florida's St. Petersburg Times, The Miami Herald and the Fox News Channel all say they obtained e-mails that seemed to be between Rep. Mark Foley and a former congressional page -- but that they didn't have enough to go public with the story.

The reporters sought more information.

"We verified the accuracy of the email we had," says Neil Brown, executive editor of the St Petersburg Times. "We also spoke with congressman Foley and spoke with the boy's parents. Congressman Foley told us we had misinterpreted it -- and in fact maybe a page had misinterpreted it."

And there it largely stood for nearly a year.

In August, however, ABC News got the e-mails, too. Once ABC's Brian Ross was done with anniversary specials on Hurricane Katrina and 9-11, his investigative unit turned its attention to Foley.

Ross had covered the page sex scandal that snared two congressmen back in 1983 --- and he read the e-mails a little differently.

"These are emails that were unusual for a 52-year-old man to be sending to a high school junior," he says, referring to the personal nature of the exchanges -- and requests for a photo.

But ABC wasn't able to confirm the e-mails with the former pages -- so Ross took them to Foley's aides.

Foley's press secretary verified the e-mails. But he said the notes were harmless, Ross says, that "this is just a case of the congressman -- you don't know Mark -- he's just overly friendly -- nothing wrong with these things at all."

The message they got, Ross says, was that "others have looked at these -- and there's no story here."

A little-known Web site posted some of the apparent exchanges, but Ross has said he didn't know about that. So Ross and his bosses were confronting the same choice as editors elsewhere: whether to run the story or not.

The answer in this case was still no -- not exactly. Viewers didn't see it on ABC's flagship evening newscast.

But Ross still found a way to crack open the story last Thursday.

The ensuing posting on ABCNews.com opened the floodgates. Within hours, people who said they were former pages sent Ross explicit instant messages that seemed to show Foley asking them about sex.

As Ross recounts it, ABC News producer Maddy Sauer called Foley's office back last Friday. She read off some of what they had accumulated.

"His former chief of staff called back 20 minutes later and said, 'the congressman is going to resign,'" Ross says, "and we want to make a deal with you."

The former aide, Kirk Fordham, confirmed the messages were real, but said Foley would exclusively talk to Ross only if Ross agreed not to post the instant messages. That wasn't even a close call for Ross. The messages went online, and the story roared forth.

The story has dominated the political scene ever since, showing how an old-fashioned media outlet can use its newfangled toys on the Internet to change the rules on how the news is broken.

And the media still was ahead of the House leadership.

 

[Skyhunter]

Is this for real?

FOX news labels Foley as a Democrat?! Is this the October surprise that Rove promised?!

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3570

Unbelieveable!

Yes it is real. And typical of FAUX news.

And did you hear Hastert's press conference? His parting shot was to blame the Democrats. Even after he had been "urged not to", by senior Republican officials.

Comments that Hastert made in a Tribune interview suggesting the scandal had been orchestrated by ABC News, Democratic political operatives aligned with the Clinton White House and liberal activist George Soros were considered a serious misstep in national Republican circles, an official said. Senior Republican officials contacted Hastert's office before his news conference Thursday to urge that he not repeat the charges and he backed away from them in his press conference.

"The Chicago Tribune interview last night—the George Soros defense—was viewed as incredibly inept," a national Republican official said. "It could have been written by [comedian] Jon Stewart."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/custom/newsroom/chi-061005hastert,1,2851683.story?page=2&cset=true&ctrack=1&coll=chi-news-hed

Now we know who writes the political satire for the daily show.

Haster backed away from his accusations the way Boehner backed away from his. It looks like Boehner is sticking to his story, kinda.

"I believe I talked to the Speaker and he told me it had been taken care of," said Boehner. "And, and, and my position is it's in his corner, it's his responsibility. The Clerk of the House who runs the page program, the Page Board—all report to the Speaker. And I believe it had been dealt with."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2006/10/boehner_points_.html

Is there a problem with the House Republican leadership? It appears that Boehner is trying to play it both ways here. He "believes" he told Hastert, and he "believes' it was handled.

What a slimy politician.

I think the GOP has some "leadership" issues.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

In particular, one cannot use this case as evidence that Republicans are, somehow, more morally flawed than others. In order to show that, one should look elsewhere.

You are missing the hypocrisy that catches up to the Republicans here. The Republicans portray themselves as morally superior to the Democrats –they call themselves the “family values” party. On top of that, gay Republicans have only recently started coming out and not many are known as yet. You may remember that it was a huge deal when Cheney’s daughter announced her sexual preference. So Foley hits on two fronts: First, by contacting teens as he did and all that goes along with that. Next, the fact that he is gay and that people knew this, is no doubt a huge shock to some people. Recall that the core of the Republican right [which is really the extreme right] are anti-gay by definition - they are fundamentalist Christians. As a result, gay [out or not] Republicans now fear a backlash [one even feared a McCarthy-like witch hunt] from this scandal. But in fact what seems to be happening is that the evangelicals are jumping ship. And this is very good because this unholy alliance is what has allowed the Republicans to take over and make such a mess of things.

IIRC, the extreme right has turned out for the Republicans in numbers close to 90%, or even more at times.

 

[arildno]

Well, it shows that they are at least as bad as the Democrats and any other politicians, but I don't see an inflated self-image primarily as a moral flaw, rather, it shows stupidity.

 

[selfAdjoint]

Next, the fact that he is gay and that people knew this, is no doubt a huge shock to some people

The canard pedophile=gay has been used to smear gays since forever. There is no necessary connection, any more than there is between heterosexuality and raping little girls.

Positive minded people want to be careful in their usage of these concepts.

 

[arildno]

Well, Foley MIGHT be gay, but too wrapped up in internal miseries that he don't dare to develop any meaningful, egalitarian relationship to some man of his own age group, but prefers to romanticize a relationship in which he is dominant and the other is an adoring/submissive fan or aide, because that's simpler for him to deal with.

If he had been more open about this, he might have developed a more mature sexuality.
But that's my opinion, anyway.

 

[Skyhunter]

The canard pedophile=gay has been used to smear gays since forever. There is no necessary connection, any more than there is between heterosexuality and raping little girls.

Positive minded people want to be careful in their usage of these concepts.

According to the peer reviewed http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/94/1/41, 98% of molested males and 99.6% of molested girls are victims of HETEROsexuals, NOT Homosexuals.

To use such a canard is either deliberate misrepresentation (lying), or ignorance. Take your pick, I see a lot of both coming from the right-wing noise machine.

Then of course you have Michael Savages angle, blame the victim.

On the October 2 edition of his nationally syndicated radio show, Michael Savage responded to allegations that former Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) sent sexually explicit messages to former congressional pages by declaring that "the kid was leading him on" and was "gay-baiting" Foley. Savage also called the page a "sleazeball" and "a greedy, aggressive child" who "went to Washington to get ahead" and "knew how to play a congressman who was gay on the gay theme."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200610050008

 

[Rach3]

WASHINGTON (AFP) - A former congressional page said he had sex with disgraced former US lawmaker Mark Foley, according to a newspaper report, as an explosive Washington political scandal continued to unfold.

The unidentified former page told the Los Angeles Times Sunday that he was 21 when he and the Florida Republican congressman had sex, and that Foley's overtures began shortly after he left the congressional page work-study program for high school students.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061008/wl_afp/uspoliticschildsexscandal_061008141247;_ylt=AooPDTcwsUzfr5m4YaI5eEqGbToC;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The canard pedophile=gay has been used to smear gays since forever. There is no necessary connection, any more than there is between heterosexuality and raping little girls.

Positive minded people want to be careful in their usage of these concepts.

I'm not saying that there is any connection but the extreme right has already implied as much in response to this scandal. Some came right out and blamed gays for covering this up. I heard it directly in some of the initial responses from the extreme right, on CNN. It was also mentioned specifically in the panel discussion at the end of this morning's "This Week" with George Stephanolpoulis.
http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/

So your point is exactly correct: This subject is a mine field...for the Republicans.

Fareed Zakaria stated that this goes beyond the level of a simple scandal; that the damage to the Republicans is long term. Also, the gay staffers involved respond by saying that they took it directly to the Republican leadership.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

...For many of those men and other gay Republicans in political Washington, reconciling their private lives and public roles has required a discreet existence. But in the last week, the Mark Foley scandal has upset that careful balance.

...Some conservative groups blamed the “gay lifestyle” and the gathering force of the “gay agenda” for the scandal. Others equated homosexuality with pedophilia, a link that has long outraged gay men and lesbians. [continued]

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/08/w...&en=04a2c0bca257d759&ei=5094&partner=homepage

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Sorry, I tried to restrain myself but I got to say it: This has become a wedgie issue for the Republicans.

 

[BobG]

Sorry, I tried to restrain myself but I got to say it: This has become a wedgie issue for the Republicans.

-groan-

Kirk Fordham doesn't help Hastert or Reynolds. Notifying Hastert or his staff in 2003 and then resigning as Foley's chief of staff; serving as Reynolds's chief of staff and then taking an active role in Foley's dealings with ABC sure makes it hard to believe the two didn't hear something about this quite a long time ago.

http://www.adelphia.net/news/read.php?ps=1018&id=13149385&_LT=HOME_LARSDCCLM_UNEWS

http://www.auburnpub.com/articles/2006/10/04/news/state/state01.txt

Reynolds has dropped into a statistical tie with his opponent for election. That could make at least two seats Foley cost Republicans, and maybe three, since this somehow seems to affect NM Rep Heather Wilson's campaign, dropping her from a tie to a 10 point deficit.

 

[ptabor]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20061008/wl_afp/uspoliticschildsexscandal_061008141247;_ylt=AooPDTcwsUzfr5m4YaI5eEqGbToC;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

this sort of smearing irritates me.

If Foley was using his power to take advantage of young men for sexual purposes, then he's a creep and should be dealt with appropriately.

If, however, he's engaging in consensual sex with another man (as this article states), what right do people have to plaster this all over the papers?
The article is even clear that the contact began after the paige program.. so where do people get off printing this? His personal life is of no interest to me, nor is it anyone else's business.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

this sort of smearing irritates me.

If Foley was using his power to take advantage of young men for sexual purposes, then he's a creep and should be dealt with appropriately.

If, however, he's engaging in consensual sex with another man (as this article states), what right do people have to plaster this all over the papers?
The article is even clear that the contact began after the paige program.. so where do people get off printing this? His personal life is of no interest to me, nor is it anyone else's business.

...Monica...

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Reynolds has dropped into a statistical tie with his opponent for election.

Now ABC reports that Reynolds trails by double digits.

 

[Astronuc]

The article is even clear that the contact began after the paige program. so where do people get off printing this? His personal life is of no interest to me, nor is it anyone else's business.

Certainly if it was consensual and the other man was an adult, it is not an issue. However, it does fit a pattern that Foley was interested in pages, some of whom were considered under age in their districts. Apparently the age of consent in District of Columbia is 16, which IMO is too young.

 

[turbo]

More Republicans knew about Foley's escapades years ago. Apparently, if you're a member of Congress, you have no responsibility to stop the predations of a pedophile - it's sufficient to simply "warn" him.

The Washington Post reported Sunday night that Rep. Jim Kolbe, R-Ariz., confronted Foley about his Internet communications with teenagers as early as 2000.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061009/ap_on_go_co/congress_pages;_ylt=AsH29olYoXbys9y5G5uqARGs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OTB1amhuBHNlYwNtdHM-

 

[ptabor]

...Monica...

IMO, these two cases (the 21 year old, specifically) are not even remotely comparable.

Bill Clinton was receiving sexual favors while he was in the oval office, a place used to conduct executive business. While he is "working" in that room, he is on my dime and I have every right to know if he is receiving oral sex on taxpayer money. Had Clinton gone to a bar and met some girl and took her home, then this would be none of my business as it was conducted on his own personal time.

Yes, Foley would have met this man while he was a page, but sexual contact did not start until after the kid was out of public service. From what I know, the sexual contact did not happen on the senate floor, so this, IMO, qualifies as his personal life.

Perhaps I'm splitting hairs here?

 

[Astronuc]

Clinton was absolutely wrong to do what he did!

However, the relationship between Monica and Bill was consensual between to adults, which still doesn't make it right, considering he was married. It was also initiated by Monica - Bill responded, but he did not initiate it.

As for being on the taxpayers dime, perhaps he did it after hours. As president, Clinton lived in the Whitehouse, so that was his home. He probably put in 8 hrs maybe 12 hrs that day.

One has to ask, when the president is on the taxpayers time and when he is not. Is Bush on the taxpayers dime when he is taking holiday at his ranch in Crawford, Texas.

As for Foley, the issue is not the consensul relationships, it is the unsolicited and salacious emails and IMs that Foley sent to one, and perhaps more, male pages under the age of 18. Even if they were 18, Foley engaged in predatory conduct, which is inappropriate.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

And for many Republicans, this is about Foley [and others] being gay as well. I know: I've spent waaaaaay too much time in the bible belt. In fact this is what gets me about the Repubicans that I know. They don't seem to uderstand that their own core would take away their rights in a heartbeat.

But the bit about Clinton being on the clock is hilarious! Yep, he should have clocked out first!

Anyway, I see that even a nuclear bomb didn't take Foley off headline news.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

With the timeline going back to 2000 now, the suggestion of an innocent oversight strains credibility.

 

[selfAdjoint]

With the timeline going back to 2000 now, the suggestion of an innocent oversight strains credibility.

Bye Bye time for Hastert, I fondly hope.

 

[turbo]

With the timeline going back to 2000 now, the suggestion of an innocent oversight strains credibility.

And some of the pages of about that time period have spoken publicly about having been warned to keep their distance from Foley. I would like to know who in Congress (members, staff, etc) warned these young men, and what they knew about Foley's behavior, and why they thought it was sufficient to warn these kids about the potential for Foley to prey upon them instead of stopping the sexual predator in the first place. No adult should cover for a pedophile when they know that children are at risk - certainly no elected or appointed public official. From news reports, it seems that the Democrats in the page program were deliberately kept in the dark about Foley's behavior, but Washington is a leaky, gossipy place, and I find it hard to believe that hints of Foley's perversions didn't get around. If any Democrats or their staff knew about this and did nothing, they should resign and potentially face criminal charges. If they knew of Foley's behavior and failed to try to stop it, they are just as complicit as Reynolds, Hastert, and Kolbe.

 

[Skyhunter]

Well, it shows that they are at least as bad as the Democrats and any other politicians, but I don't see an inflated self-image primarily as a moral flaw, rather, it shows stupidity.

This has been going on since before the Monica Lewinski scandal.

You said they, whoever "they" are, are as bad as the Democrats.

Can you name any current Democratic pedophiles that have been covered for by the current Democratic leadership?

This is not about one bad apple, as the Repub's like to say. Foley's preying on pages has been known since at least 2000, when AZ Rep. Jim Kolbe confronted Foley after being shown sexually explicit emails by a page from Foley.

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.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/08/AR2006100800855.html

This hurts the Republicans because their leadership didn't take action. Foley had been hitting on the pages for 11 years. Hastert should step down for incompetence if nothing else. If he had acted and investigated further, this issue would be dead right now. Foley could have been censured, his seat would be safe, and Hastert, Reynolds, and Boehner would be looking good.

Instead, by it coming out weeks before a crucial election, and the leadership giving conflilcting accounts of who knew what when, and what actions were or were not taken, etc, has greatly damaged the Republican chances in this election. I saw a headline that read GOP in Meltdown. It sure looks that way to me.

Forget about the speakership, I would not be surprised if Hastert loses his seat!

 

[BobG]

This hurts the Republicans because their leadership didn't take action. Foley had been hitting on the pages for 11 years. Hastert should step down for incompetence if nothing else. If he had acted and investigated further, this issue would be dead right now. Foley could have been censured, his seat would be safe, and Hastert, Reynolds, and Boehner would be looking good.

Instead, by it coming out weeks before a crucial election, and the leadership giving conflilcting accounts of who knew what when, and what actions were or were not taken, etc, has greatly damaged the Republican chances in this election. I saw a headline that read GOP in Meltdown. It sure looks that way to me.

Forget about the speakership, I would not be surprised if Hastert loses his seat!

This was Hastert's last term as speaker regardless of how the elections turn out. Hastert was DeLay's guy and DeLay is gone. He always has been somewhat incompetent in comparison to what you would normally expect from a Speaker of the House, but that's what endeared him so much to Tom DeLay. Hastert really is taking one for the GOP by sticking it out - if he can take the heat that long.

This is good for Republicans - really. Fur will fly and you'll see some serious (and some seriously needed) restructuring after this election. It might even be fun to be a Republican again.

 

[Skyhunter]

This is good for Republicans - really. Fur will fly and you'll see some serious (and some seriously needed) restructuring after this election. It might even be fun to be a Republican again.

I agree this is going to be good for the party in the long run.