Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

ABC ONLINE GLITCH LEADS TO IDENTITY OF FOLEY ACCUSER; FEATURED IM EXCHANGE WAS WITH 18 YEAR OLD
The Drudge Report ^ | 10-04-06 | Drudge

Posted on 10/04/2006 5:12:16 PM PDT by jrooney

A posting of an unredacted instant message sessions between Rep. Mark Foley and a former congressional page has apparently exposed the identity of the now 21 year-old accuser...

ABC RELEASED TRANSCRIPT OF ONE CHAT BETWEEN FOLEY AND A MAN WHO WAS 18 AT THE TIME OF THE INSTANT MESSAGE EXCHANGE.... NETWORK STATED THE MESSAGE WAS TO 'UNDER AGE' TEEN... DEVELOPING...

ABC ONLINE GLITCH LEADS TO IDENTITY OF FOLEY ACCUSER; FEATURED IM EXCHANGE WAS WITH 18 YEAR OLD

(Excerpt) Read more at drudgereport.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 200601; 20061107; 4thestate5thcolumn; abcdisney; aravosis; barbaramikulski; biasmeanslayoffs; billburton; boycottdisney; brianrosssucks; burton; byebyedems; cuespookymusic; disneynews; distortion; drivebymedia; election; enemedia; fakebutaccurate; foley; foleygate; hitandrunjournalism; homosexualactivist; homosexualagenda; johnaravosis; liberalmedia; mediabias; mediajihad; mediawar; mikerogers; mikulski; mslm; msm; phoneylibscandal298; powerghraib; rogers; smearcampaign; targetlist; thailand; trysellingthetruth; waltsrotatingcorpse; yellowjournalism
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 421-440441-460461-480 ... 1,401-1,409 next last
To: jrooney

In view of all that, Congressman Foley oughta get his Congressional seat back, and sincere apologies from everyone involved.


441 posted on 10/04/2006 6:27:25 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Are you wearing shorts?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeorgiaDawg32
Colmes saying Studds was consentual, these IM's weren't.

Aren't there statuatory rape laws in Massachussets? The young man was 17 at the time. Shouldn't Studds be in jail if that is the case?

I know this is a laughable notion, given that he was a Democrat, but still...

442 posted on 10/04/2006 6:27:30 PM PDT by Connservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 374 | View Replies]

To: stillbjorn
Anyone else think that these IM's are fake? Its a lot easier to fake IM logs than it is to fake Air National Guard documents from the '70s...

I would not doubt that for a second.

443 posted on 10/04/2006 6:27:36 PM PDT by Fawn (http://www.jokaroo.com/funnyvideos/toilet_obsession.html)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

How could ABC make a mistake like this? Did they honestly believe it wouldn't be found out that the kid was eighteen when the IM took place?

Now that they've been found out, its just one seat and questionable at that.

ABC has now lost all credibility.


444 posted on 10/04/2006 6:27:58 PM PDT by marajade (Yes, I'm a SW freak!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 427 | View Replies]

To: Smartaleck
Already posted.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1713818/posts

Full story here though...scroll waaayyyyy down.

Who cares if a story is posted WAY DOWN on an earler thread.

Why don't you already posted people leave everyone else alone?

445 posted on 10/04/2006 6:28:06 PM PDT by Mr. Brightside
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent
"what do you want for your birthday [when you are legal and can have homosexual sex]?"

A-ha!

446 posted on 10/04/2006 6:28:18 PM PDT by Petronski (Living His life abundantly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 415 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
The questions this raises are the date of the lewd exchange, before or after the Feb 2003 18th birthday? and does the exchange posted above violates Foley's own anti-internet-solicitation-of-minors statute?

Which I am sure the FBI is investigating.

447 posted on 10/04/2006 6:28:22 PM PDT by bnelson44 (Proud parent of a tanker! (Charlie Mike, son))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 436 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44

Ok, you must have had problems with subtraction in shcool. Put up your fingers, count 1, 2. February to
arch, March to
April! Birthday in February, emails sent in APRIL!!!


448 posted on 10/04/2006 6:28:30 PM PDT by blondee123 (Politicians are like diapers, need to be changed often & for the same reason!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: Tatze

I guess I'm being stupid here, but I thought this whole mess was because the congressman had approached a child who was 16 years old. Now I hear the guy was either 18 or almost 18. I'm having a hard time getting excited over an 18 year old man who can't figure out how to handle unwanted advances from an old man. I thought I read the age of sexual consent was 16. Would some smart person please explain what is going on to me?


449 posted on 10/04/2006 6:28:42 PM PDT by pepperdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44

You're kidding right? Blogger is the Edsall of the internet.

He could have put a "publish on" date in and the program burped or something.

Anyway, what's your point? All the author said was that he didn't finish all he was going to say before his post, for whatever reason, got published and that, therefore, he was going to come back later and complete his article.


450 posted on 10/04/2006 6:28:49 PM PDT by wouldntbprudent (If you can: Contribute more (babies) to the next generation of God-fearing American Patriots!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David

It doesn't matter if it took place before he was 18. He's talking about meeting after he turns 18, which is perfectly legal.


451 posted on 10/04/2006 6:28:52 PM PDT by Northeastern_Realist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 436 | View Replies]

To: Fawn

If they were fake, why not come out and say so?


452 posted on 10/04/2006 6:28:55 PM PDT by letsgonova19087
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 443 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44

Tell me how, and I'll go into vital statistics and find his birthday for you.


453 posted on 10/04/2006 6:28:57 PM PDT by CindyDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: The_Reader_David
...and does the exchange posted above violates Foley's own anti-internet-solicitation-of-minors statute?

Is that law retroactive?
454 posted on 10/04/2006 6:29:17 PM PDT by msnimje (Seriously, if it REALLY were a religion of PEACE, would they have to label it as such?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 436 | View Replies]

To: wouldntbprudent

All good points.

In the IM's, Jordan Edmund worries about his Mom finding out what he's up to. I wonder how Jordan feels now that his Mom can read the total content of his "dirty talk" with a 50+ homosexual? And so can millions of other people.


455 posted on 10/04/2006 6:29:38 PM PDT by Palladin (Log Cabin Republicans have wooden heads.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 415 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!

"posted on 10/04/2006 6:27:25 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Are you wearing shorts?) "

given the nature of the discussion, might want to change your tag line.


456 posted on 10/04/2006 6:29:42 PM PDT by 1curiousmind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 441 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44

Now you are deliberately twisting words. You know darn well that that post wasn't saying that it was OK for him to break the law for only a few weeks. The post was obviously pointing to the fact that the sexual messages, which were made quite a few months into the year, occured AFTER HIS BIRTHDAY which was only a few weeks into the year!

That does it. It is pointless talking to you anymore. You have been told, time and again, that the messages that could possibly make this illegal, were sent AFTER his birthday. There are timestamps on the freaking IMs. If screen caps and timestamps don't do it for you, then nothing will. You can continue your game with others who will fall for it.


457 posted on 10/04/2006 6:29:49 PM PDT by NinoFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 426 | View Replies]

To: bnelson44
But I am still confused.

You think we don't already know that from all your other replies.

Read on and learn instead of interrupting like a perpetual question machine.

458 posted on 10/04/2006 6:29:52 PM PDT by capt. norm (Liberalism = cowardice disguised as tolerance.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 278 | View Replies]

To: ground_fog

Hugh just asks the question. No answers, just questions.


459 posted on 10/04/2006 6:29:53 PM PDT by bnelson44 (Proud parent of a tanker! (Charlie Mike, son))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 440 | View Replies]

To: I_like_good_things_too

According to Page Alumni website, this guy finished his Page duty in 2002. The blog contains screen shots of this webpage stating the date he finshed his service. HE WAS NOT A PAGE OR INTERN AT THIS POINT!!! :-)

LLS


460 posted on 10/04/2006 6:29:56 PM PDT by LibLieSlayer (Preserve America... kill terrorists... destroy dims!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 421-440441-460461-480 ... 1,401-1,409 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson