Meet Jordan Edmund One Mark Foley Instant Messanger

Passionate America ^ | 10/4/06 | Wild Bill

[Gribbit]

Mark Foley is a scumbag! Mark Foley is a scumbag! Mark Foley is a scumbag!

Now that that is out of the way I will reveal how I (and a few others) discovered Jordan Edmund was one of the former house pages that participated in sexually explicit instant messages with Rep. Mark Foley. Also I will explain to you why I believe it necessary to reveal Jordan Edmund's identity. You may not agree with my decision, but I hope to explain my reasoning by the end of this story.

Read More HERE!

[PghBaldy]

Child Modeling Exploitation Prevention Act (Introduced in House)[H.R.1142.IH]
Child Fingerprints Safekeeping Act of 2006 (Introduced in House)[H.R.5773.IH]
Child Predator Act of 2005 (Introduced in House)[H.R.1355.IH]
Protecting Our Children from Violence Act of 2005 (Introduced in House)[H.R.1223.IH] I will double check it's probably HR 1355

[bigjoesaddle]

NOthing on the news yet, but Rush and Hanity will be on it.

[areafiftyone]

I hope so because the MSM is ignoring an important thing just because they want the Republicans OUT OF POWER!

[PghBaldy]

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.4472: There are 5 versions of Bill Number H.R.4472 for the 109th Congress
1 . Children's Safety and Violent Crime Reduction Act of 2005 (Introduced in House)[H.R.4472.IH]
2 . Children's Safety and Violent Crime Reduction Act of 2006 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)[H.R.4472.EH]
3 . Children's Safety and Violent Crime Reduction Act of 2006 (Placed on Calendar in Senate)[H.R.4472.PCS]
4 . Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (Engrossed Amendment as Agreed to by Senate)[H.R.4472.EAS]
5 . Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)[H.R.4472.ENR]

It appears the 2003 Ims would not be covered, IF this is the law people are referring to (it just might be- on the first day of so of the scandal, a montage showing John walsh was shown...)

[PghBaldy]

well done. I hope Hastert and other Repubs fight back. I'm sick of the Roy Blunt/Tony Blankley wussies.

[batter]

sounds like some kind of set up

I feel it was fairly consensual or the ex-page was just engaging to document Foley's misbehavior with the intent of having action taken. I'm not sure his intent was having ABC get involved...do we know who provided the IMs to ABC? - ie was it him or did somebody 'leak' them to ABC?

[phoenix0468]

On the other hand, I am absolutely sick of the MSM using unnamed sources and not telling us from whom they obtained their information in their politically charged reporting. We do deserve to know whether their unnamed sources have an ax to grind and for whom.

I agree with this statement 100%. Some of these idividuals whose lives and careers are ruined by irresponsible news media should sue the crap out of them. There should be no limit to the amount of damage a person can rest from a media outlet that doesn't reveal it's source in a case where allegations such as what is happening with Foley are made. But to out someone who was a minor at the time some of the IMs were sent? I'm not so sure I like that.

This I do not agree with. Primarily because the page was 18, or some have indicated, at the time the IMs were sent. In addition, this man has hired a defense attorney. Why would he have to do this if there isn't the likelyhood that he has done something illegal. Revealing private communications, in this case an IM, without the consent of the other party could be a crime in some parts of the country, just as it is illegal to record someone on the phone without consent. I am not 100% sure of this, but it would not surpirse me if this is the case.

[Enchante]

Great minds thinking alike..... just before I opened this thread and saw your usual magnificent research, I was just thinking how April 2003 would have been exactly the time frame in which Joe Wilson and friends were getting up a head of steam because he went to that DSPC meeting on May 3, 2003 to launch his jihad against the Bush administration......

Coincidence??? Or were Soros-funded scumbags chatting away all over DC about how to "get the goods" on eviiiillll Republicans??

Don't need any tin-foil to know that a lot of leftist scumbags talk to each other and feel justified in launching their jihads against eviiiiillll conservatives.....

[anymouse]

Edmund is from Berkeley, CA. Any chance that he is a liberal infiltrator sent by the Moveon types to target vulnerable Republican officeholders? Who sponsored his page assignment?

[doesnt suffer fools gladly]

Sorry, I haven't read all the posts yet, but why is the LSM still running with this non-scandal? ABC news website is acting like it's Watergate. What gives?

[madison10]

Could ABC have INTENTIONALLY left his name on the posted image, so that people like us would find it, and cause outrage and dissension in Republican ranks?

How is the revealing causing outrage among Republicans? I think it's having the opposite effect...and we've all agreed to TOTALLY distrust any alphabet soup media outlet.

[woollyone]

"...crime victims..."

Lighten up please! This guy saved the IMs to use at a later date for some purpose (can you say possible blackmail?) and certainly voluntarily participated in the IMs

So we're not talking about little Bo-Peep, minding her sheep...we're talking about an 18 yo (adult) homosexual male who voluntarily conversed with another homosexual male about sexual fantasies and such and then saved the conversations for a later date...now comes the later date when he revealed his saved IMs and you claim he's a "crime victim"?

Puhlease...stop with the naivete'

[Gaffer]

Something that the dweebies from the MSM can't seem to get the hang of.....they've been used to being spoon-fed DNC talking points all of these years, they couldn't investigate their way of of a paper bag full of sh!t.

[Michamilton]

The IM's were dated April ...2 months AFTER Feb B-day.

I keep seeing this stated, but haven't seen any confirmation of the April dating, Anybody?

[Lib Buster]

There you go!

[Michamilton]

OTOH, whoever was toying with Foley in those IM's didn't appear to HAVE to be groomed..That was a two way conversation.

from the IM, it sounded like it had been going on quite a while - I don't think a tentative dating of a single message from after he turned 18 necessarily means that this didn't start earlier..

[fml]

No, he was 18 - a man not a minor. Agreeing with DU is something you should have checked out ;)

[fml]

What victim??

[pepsionice]

People that keep achieves of IM's....do so with a purpose. There is little doubt in my mind that he knew precisely what he was going to do with the IM's...my guess is that he tried this year to get a juicy job in DC at high salary...and got flat turned down. Foley probably even tried to help a little...but a young guy around 21 years old...isn't going to pull in more than $60k in the DC area. He was probably betting that Foley would ensure a position on his staff, and he failed miserably...so it was revenge time.

As for privacy of the IM...if these stupid congressmen can't stop identity theft or computer hackers...why should anyone dream of information privacy on the web? Get real. The politicans have guaranteed their buddies of an absolute open door...so now...here is trouble on your doorstep. I think this is totally open for anyone to do...and I don't have heartburn. No one should.

[paltz]

This is how the libs are spinning it in case you're wondering:

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Blogger_outs_boy_in_Foley_scandal_1004.html
If the boy was over the age of 18 at the time of the messages, Foley's communication with him would likely still be considered criminal. Sex predator legislation is generally written bearing in mind that law enforcement sting operations rely on undercover officers pretending to be minors.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2865796&mesg_id=2865796