Posted on 09/30/2006 6:33:09 PM PDT by mathprof
Top House Republicans knew for months about e-mail traffic between Representative Mark Foley and a former teenage page, but kept the matter secret and allowed Mr. Foley to remain head of a Congressional caucus on children’s issues, Republican lawmakers said Saturday.
The exchanges began with what Republicans now describe as an “overfriendly” e-mail message from Mr. Foley to the unidentified teenager. But news reports about the exchanges have led to the disclosure of e-mail correspondence with other former pages in which the discussions became more and more sexually explicit. Shortly after he was confronted by ABC News on Friday about the subject, Mr. Foley, who represented a south Florida district, resigned from the House.
The revelations set off a political upheaval, with Democrats and some Republicans alike calling for a full investigation of Mr. Foley’s conduct and whether House leaders did enough to look into it. Members of the Republican leadership sought Saturday to detail how they had handled the case in an effort to defuse the matter, even as it was emerging as an issue in Congressional races.
Among those who became aware of the communication in the fall of 2005 between Mr. Foley and the 16-year-old page, who worked for Representative Rodney Alexander, Republican of Louisiana, were Representative John A. Boehner, the majority leader, and Representative Thomas M. Reynolds of New York, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee. Mr. Reynolds said in a statement Saturday that he had also personally raised the issue with Speaker J. Dennis Hastert earlier this year.
“Despite the fact that I had not seen the e-mails in question, and Mr. Alexander told me that the parents didn’t want the matter pursued, I told the speaker of the conversation Mr. Alexander had with me,” Mr. Reynolds said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
They should have kept a wary eye on this guy.
The evidence they had were non-sexually explicit e-mails and also the parents did not want it to be pursued any further.
Should a parent's wishes be overruled?
who is excusing his behavior?
That's not the point. The point is, if they pursued it by legal means or any means beyond what they did, it would be public and the parents and that page would be dragged in.
And when the newer evidence came out, the first thing they did was boot foley.
Now contrast to what the typical democrat response would have been.
Many times parents wishes are not in the best interest of anyone but their own child. That is why some laws have changed so that even if the victim doesn't want to pursue something, law officials have to.
"Looks as if it is. Why isn't he or the parents proceeding with the case?"
It doesn't matter, laws that protect minors from adult perverts don't have to be supported by the minors parents. The state brings the charges.
And what will the state do if the victim and his parents don't cooperate?
You think reproduction the emails before a jury is enough?
The MSM knew in 2000, 2002, 2004 etc.
(and Barney Frank is still in congress)
So you are saying that they are bad parents and that you know better.
Are you in any way giving any support for a reprobate 50+ year old that hits on 16 year old boys?
Actually, with your statement above you already answered my question. Pull your head out of your posterior, you science-fiction obsessed twit. Or just go get lost.
On this matter, "Republican" or no, no ground should be ceded. Actually, it is helpful, as we see those on this forum too twisted to understand simple wrong from right, evil from good. Thanks for your reply, I now see what camp you fall in.
Press what charges? "A congressman is bothering my kid with e-mail" charges?
The parents did not seem overly concerned. No one but Alexander saw the e-mail. The e-mail wasn't sexual. There are a whole lot of conclusions one can come to under those circumstances. Screaming "Mark Foley must be a pervert, we need to kick him out" would have been a gross over-reaction.
And in their not doing so, other kids were dragged in, making the situation much worse.
why?
That is BS.
Hasert is right in accpting his resignation.
The MSM knew ALL ALONG about Foley's homosexual antics. There were reporters who were trying to get him to come out of the closet FOR YEARS because of the homosexual marriage debate and the lawsuits about homosexuals banned from adopting children (they lost) AND most recently in the chit chat about his potential run for the senate.
Hassert is fine. This is the NYT save it for the DUmies.
If McCain turns out to be the GOP nom in '08 and is outpolling Hillary or whoever in September, the Dems are heading out to the graveyard with a backhoe. Count on it.
"And what will the state do if the victim and his parents don't cooperate?
You think reproduction the emails before a jury is enough?"
They will collect more evidence, probably phone records, other witnesses and they will call the boy during the trial.
Why are you so interested in getting this pervert off on a technicality?
Which is something the leadership didn't know at the time.
Why is this so hard?
"Why are you so interested in getting this pervert off on a technicality?"
I'm not, are you?
Now contrast to what the typical democrat response would have been
So you're comparing bad behavior to worse behavior? That's not good enough.
"Should a parent's wishes be overruled?"
Yes. If someone doesn't want an investigation into statitory rape that doesn't mean the police don't have to investigate. It just means the parents are lousy parents.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.