Republican hypocrisy alert:

[Starla]

Originally Posted by *************

okay, i am a pretty hardcore conservative. but any one who tries to stand up for this guy in any way, shape, or form is off their rocker.

A gop staffer warned a young page as far back as 2001 about Foley and his behavior. They covered up for him for years. I'd say *those* particular people were off their rocker. News

but also, people who use this guy to generalize traits to the repubican party are also off their rocker.

Yes, but don't you find it strange there is quite a list of gop who are in trouble with federal crimes as it is? Many of these people spent years of their lives sitting in judgement on others. IE: Rush Limbaugh for starters. The fact that some of these people covered Foley's ass for years is digusting, and all involved should step down from their positions. They are accessories to his crime.

I don't intend to group them ALL together and say they are ALL doing the same thing and that all are alike in character.

the only point that needs to be made about this guy is that he is messed up. a gross, gross man.

Also the people who covered up for him....

by the way, ABC slipped up and put the user name of the "underage" kid on their website for a few seconds. they found out that at the time of the emails, the kid was actually over 18.

But the FBI claims they have evidence of others who are underage. I don't know, it will all surface eventually if so.

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by *************

by the way, ABC slipped up and put the user name of the "underage" kid on their website for a few seconds. they found out that at the time of the emails, the kid was actually over 18.

source of this info?

[BlueStar]

CLAIM: FILTHY FOLEY ONLINE MESSAGES WERE PAGE PRANK GONE AWRY

DRUDGE REPORT

According to two people close to former congressional page Jordan Edmund, the now famous lurid AOL Instant Message exchanges that led to the resignation of Mark Foley were part of an online prank that by mistake got into the hands of enemy political operatives, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal... Developing...

[Corganist]

Originally Posted by BlueStar

CLAIM: FILTHY FOLEY ONLINE MESSAGES WERE PAGE PRANK GONE AWRY

DRUDGE REPORT

According to two people close to former congressional page Jordan Edmund, the now famous lurid AOL Instant Message exchanges that led to the resignation of Mark Foley were part of an online prank that by mistake got into the hands of enemy political operatives, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal... Developing...

A little more...

According to two people close to former congressional page Jordan Edmund, the now famous lurid AOL Instant Message exchanges that led to the resignation of Mark Foley were part of an online prank that by mistake got into the hands of enemy political operatives, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal.

According to one Oklahoma source who knows the former page very well, Edmund, a conservative Republican, goaded Foley to type embarrassing comments that were then shared with a small group of young Hill politicos. The prank went awry when the saved IM sessions got into the hands of political operatives favorable to Democrats. This source, an ally of Edmund, also adamantly proclaims that the former page is not a homosexual. The prank scenario was confirmed by a second associate of Edmund.

The news come on the heels that former FBI Chief Louis Freeh has been named to investigate the mess.

Developing...

I don't think this matters one bit even if true. Even if Foley was "goaded" into the comments by the page because he knew about Foley's creepy proclivities, Foley still played right into things and outed himself as a pervert. I suppose there might be some question about the motives of this so-called prank (ie. was it some kind of political setup?). But none of this gets Foley anywhere close to off the hook. If anything, it makes him look like a pervert and a dupe.

[Trotskilicious]

lol @ "enemy political operatives."

[Debaser]

Considering that last line about Freeh being named to investigate is completely false, I doubt that the rest of the story has any credibility anyways. Besides the fact that Drudge is already notoriously unreliable.

[Debaser]

Drudge on his radio show the other day tried to blame it on the kids anyways. I mean, no 50 year old man can resist the lure of sexy underage boys, come on! Foley is the victim here, obviously.

[JokeyLoki]

Ok, so he's an alcoholic, he was molested by a clergyman, he's gay, and it was a prank he was pushed into doing.

Sounds like the truth to me!

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by BlueStar

CLAIM: FILTHY FOLEY ONLINE MESSAGES WERE PAGE PRANK GONE AWRY

DRUDGE REPORT

According to two people close to former congressional page Jordan Edmund, the now famous lurid AOL Instant Message exchanges that led to the resignation of Mark Foley were part of an online prank that by mistake got into the hands of enemy political operatives, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal... Developing...

Three more former congressional pages have come forward to reveal what they call "sexual approaches" over the Internet from former Congressman Mark Foley.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/...more_form.html

"This was no prank," said one of the three former pages who talked to ABC News today about his experience with the congressman.

[homechicago]

Originally Posted by Debaser

And according to fox news & bill o'reilly, a democrat.

http://static.crooksandliars.com/200...ley-BO-Dem.jpg

wtf.

I'm SURE it was a mistake. yeah, right(ie). No sense of shame, no sense that they are ever capable of ever doing anything wrong. Wasn't this on Bill (I harrass people with filthy talk but pretend to be above everyone) O'Lielly's show?

[homechicago]

Originally Posted by Orenthal James

he switched parties in the 80s.

and hasn't changed parties in the last week.

.

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by homechicago

I'm SURE it was a mistake. yeah, right(ie). No sense of shame, no sense that they are ever capable of ever doing anything wrong. Wasn't this on Bill (I harrass people with filthy talk but pretend to be above everyone) O'Lielly's show?

Do you need a tissue, crybaby?

[Trotskilicious]

You guys wouldn't even be posting that fucking screen cap of a typo on the ORLY Factor if it wasn't for the Daily Show. Go wash your fucking sandals you dirty hippies.

[homechicago]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

Do you need a tissue, crybaby?

waaa, waaaa, waaaaaaaaaaaaa

a whole box please.

[Future Boy]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

You guys wouldn't even be posting that fucking screen cap of a typo on the ORLY Factor if it wasn't for the Daily Show. Go wash your fucking sandals you dirty hippies.

He wasnt the only one to report it. He wasnt even the first Im sure.

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

You guys wouldn't even be posting that fucking screen cap of a typo on the ORLY Factor if it wasn't for the Daily Show. Go wash your fucking sandals you dirty hippies.

I posted it before it aired on the Daily Show.

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by Trotskilicious

Do you need a tissue, crybaby?

how about a solution?

[Trotskilicious]

Originally Posted by Debaser

how about a solution?

Better copy editors at Fox News?

[Tchocky]

Originally Posted by *************

how is a liberal page any more reliable?

BECAUSE IT'S LIBERAL! IF IT AIN'T LEFT, IT AIN'T RIGHT! FUCK FOX NEWS! FUCK CNN! FUCK MURDOCH! READ CHOMSKY! WATCH OLBERMANN!! LOVE ALL CREATURES! AMEN!

*smacks forehead* GODDAMN IT!

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by *************

how is it UNreliable? go on, PLEASE tell me. it's no secret that it's a conservative site, but how is it unreliable? how is a liberal page any more reliable?

Its a gossip rag. In the interest of being first, he posts unsubstantiated stories or rumors before they are fact checked. In the "prank" post story, the last line of the story saying the Freeh was appointed to investigate is not true. The appointment was blocked and Freeh himself turned it down. And when Drudge gets around to correct that factual error, he just changes it and never even notes the correction.


And then there's the bias. He posts that "prank" story, that shifts blame away from the republicans, on top of the page in big headline. But hey, where is the story about the three other pages that have come forward? If true, that pretty much dispels the ridiculous theory that this was just a prank. But where is that story posted on drudge? Is it the same big headline?

[Debaser]

Here's an article dissecting how Drudge cherry picked quotes out of a Wesley Clark speech in order to distort his position.

http://www.cjrdaily.org/politics/dru...s_a_tool_o.php

[Corganist]

Drudge got out front of everybody else in the media on the Lewinsky mess, and he's pretty much ridden his reputation on that ever since. I think that's pretty much the only time he's had a scoop ever amount to anything substantial. I wouldn't say he's totally unreliable, but its a good idea to take everything he lists as an "exclusive" to his site with BIG grains of salt. He seems to get burned on a lot of things he starts off making a big deal out of.

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by Corganist

Drudge got out front of everybody else in the media on the Lewinsky mess, and he's pretty much ridden his reputation on that ever since. I think that's pretty much the only time he's had a scoop ever amount to anything substantial. I wouldn't say he's totally unreliable, but its a good idea to take everything he lists as an "exclusive" to his site with BIG grains of salt. He seems to get burned on a lot of things he starts off making a big deal out of.

Corganist: liberal scum. Why do you hate America?

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by *************

the bit about the three others is there, dude. www.drudgereport.com

The prank stuff is still at the very top and the three others is at below right. Do you think the incoherent theory that Foley fell for a "prank" is more important than the fact that three more pages have come forward?

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by *************

haha. there was an article about a week ago saying how much all of the politicians used drudge's site. not just republicans.

haha. what happened to your righteous indignity towards the accusation that drudge is unreliable?

[Corganist]

Originally Posted by Debaser

The prank stuff is still at the very top and the three others is at below right. Do you think the incoherent theory that Foley fell for a "prank" is more important than the fact that three more pages have come forward?

I don't think the "prank" theory is all that incoherent. If Foley had a reputation among the pages as being someone who letches after the young boys, then that'd make him a prime target for people to string him along and mess with him. It still doesn't even approach getting Foley off the hook, especially with more people coming forward. Even if the person Foley was talking to on those IMs was just stringing him along to goad him into making embarrassing statements, the fact of the matter is still that Foley apparently didn't know it was a prank and made all the incriminating statements in good faith.

Frankly, I don't see why Drudge would try to reinforce the "prank" story. It doesn't help Foley or the Republicans one bit unless the pranksters had some kind of political motive (which as of right now seems highly unlikely). Along the same lines, I don't see why those on the left would want to discredit the prank story. Foley looks just as bad either way.

[Debaser]

Originally Posted by Corganist

Frankly, I don't see why Drudge would try to reinforce the "prank" story. It doesn't help Foley or the Republicans one bit unless the pranksters had some kind of political motive (which as of right now seems highly unlikely). Along the same lines, I don't see why those on the left would want to discredit the prank story. Foley looks just as bad either way.

Because dumbfucks like ************* will eat up the prank story and think Foley is innocent. Or take the heat off Republicans. Or blame democrats. Or blame the teens. The prank story is just a pathetic and desperate deflection.

[Effloresce]

http://i12.tinypic.com/2hs956v.jpg

[BlueStar]

It's all a big gay Dem conspiracy...

Republican Gays are Closeted Dems
By Cliff Kincaid | October 12, 2006

The complex nature of the "dirty trick" against the Republicans over the Mark Foley scandal is beginning to emerge. It doesn't involve a George Soros-funded group or emails that had been in the possession of the media or shopped around by Democratic operatives. Instead, the GOP has played a trick on itself. The party brought so-called gay Republicans into positions of power in Congress only to realize that the confidential information they held about a secret gay network was political dynamite that could backfire.

At this point in the scandal, the issue is not whether there was such a network, but how big it is. CBS Evening News correspondent Gloria Borger reported the emerging belief that "a group of high-level gay Republican staffers were protecting" Foley. A New York Times story by Mark Leibovich confirmed that gay Republicans have occupied "crucial staff positions" in Congress and "have played decisive roles in passing legislation, running campaigns and advancing careers."

The mystery man at the center of the scandal, Jeff Trandahl, is supposed to be a "lifelong Republican" who is gay. But Trandahl, who supervised the congressional page program as House clerk and knew about the controversial Foley emails many years ago, has a strange way of showing his Republicanism. A search of Federal Election Commission (FEC) records over the last six years shows no financial contributions to the Republican Party or Republican candidates. Instead, Trandahl in 2000 gave $1,200 to the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund, which gives over 80 percent of its political campaign money to Democrats.

Trandahl is so much of a Republican that he joined the board of the Human Rights Campaign Fund, another gay political action committee that commits most of its funds to electing Democrats. Its latest list of "winning candidates" is all Democrats, except for Republican Senator Lincoln Chafee, who admits not voting for President Bush in 2004.

If you are getting the idea that gay Republicans may be closeted Democrats, then you are beginning to understand how the Mark Foley scandal could have been a Democratic Party dirty trick.

In response to the scandal, a representative of the Log Cabin Republicans, a homosexual activist group, has been on cable channels like CNN and MSNBC expressing the fear that the Foley scandal will be used to root out homosexual influence in the Republican Party. But the Log Cabin Republicans are so Republican that its board voted 22-2 against endorsing President Bush in 2004 because of his stand against homosexual marriage.

So if the gay Republicans are not really Republicans, what are they? One veteran observer of this network told AIM that the Foley scandal should make it crystal clear that the gay Republicans are in reality "liberal activists" who want to use the party to advance the same homosexual agenda embraced by the Democrats.

Ominously, the Foley scandal suggests that this network has inside information about the sexual behavior of members of Congress and their staffers that can be exploited in order to create scandals at a moment's notice. Only now are House Republican leaders like Dennis Hastert beginning to understand the trap they may have gotten themselves into. They thought they were being tolerant and diverse and constructing a "big tent" when they were giving gay Republicans important positions of power. It is now apparent that this power has been used to sabotage the party from within. Conservatives who blame Soros, the media or the Democrats for this debacle are whistling past the graveyard, which happens to be near the place where Hastert made his statement the other day that staffers will be fired "if there was a cover-up."

It is extremely significant that Rep. Jim Kolbe, an openly gay Republican, has emerged to play a key role in the Foley scandal. Embraced by Hastert in a video tribute at a Log Cabin Republican event earlier this year, Kolbe was the first closeted gay Republican to have been threatened and blackmailed by radical gay activists into coming out of the closet and embracing key parts of the gay agenda.

Now we find out that Kolbe, a former page himself, knew about Foley's emails as far back as 2000. That is when he was a member of the House Page Board. Kolbe, according to the Washington Post, served as a "mentor" to the pages and "invited four former pages to make use of his Washington home," supposedly when he was out of town. In the most recent revelation, it has been reported that Kolbe took two former pages, both male, on a trip to the Grand Canyon.

Kolbe says that a former page told him that he was receiving emails from Foley that made him feel uncomfortable. Instead of passing this information on to House leaders or other authorities, Kolbe says that he provided it to Foley's office and Trandahl. In a statement, Kolbe said that he assumed the email contact ceased "since the former Page never raised the issue again with my office."

How about that for accountability? The information about a former page being sexually harassed by Foley is turned over to Foley and Trandahl, two of Kolbe's fellow homosexuals. It's no wonder the young man didn't raise the matter again with Kolbe. He saw that it was a dead end.

Kolbe also declared, in his statement, that he believed this was the "appropriate way to handle this incident given the information I had and the fact that the young man was no longer a Page and not subject to the jurisdiction of the program." Such a statement seems to suggest that Kolbe viewed the pages as fair game for Foley, or at least a private matter for the disgraced Congressman, once they became former pages. That is exactly the modus operandi that Foley seems to have used. He targeted and cultivated the young men when they were working for Congress and then made his move when they had left the page program. Foley's progression from "friendly" to "explicit" Internet messages was part of his pattern as a homosexual pedophile predator.

Some liberal and left-wing groups, in addition to the gay Republican organizations, seem fearful of what the investigation might uncover. But radical gay activists sympathetic to the Democratic Party's pro-homosexual agenda are already naming the names of members of the secret network, reaching from Congress into the White House and the Republican National Committee. One such activist is Michael Rogers. Another is John Aravosis, who worked for Republican Senator Ted Stevens from 1989 to 1994.

Trandahl, who was appointed by Hastert as House Clerk in 1999 and resigned on November 18, 2005, figures in almost every important account of the Foley scandal as someone with inside information. David Rogers of the Wall Street Journal noted that Trandahl was "an adviser and friend" to Foley and was "in a unique position to recognize the implicit danger in the fact that Mr. Foley wasn't just close to pages on the House floor but was pursuing contact via email." Although Trandahl has hired a lawyer and hasn't talked publicly, numerous reports portray him in a flattering light, saying he tried to warn various Congressional officials about Foley's conduct. Calls to Trandahl and his lawyer were not returned.

It seems appropriate to note that one of the few Republicans financially supported by the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund, the pro-Democratic group to which Trandahl made his contributions in 2000, was Rep. Jim Kolbe. Was the first "openly gay" Republican member of Congress a closeted Democrat as well? It's certainly the case that he started acting more like a Democrat once his secret life was exposed. He has, for example, become a prominent advocate of gays in the military and has denounced the proposed federal amendment protecting traditional marriage.

It is also beyond dispute that the current scandalous state of affairs will outlive the Foley scandal unless the secret network of bludgeon and blackmail is exposed.

An investigation of Kolbe, 64, is obviously warranted. He may be retiring from Congress, but his camping trip with 17-year-old male pages seems to be at least as questionable as the Foley Internet messages. Let's hope knee-jerk Republican defenders don't try to defend that trip as just a "friendly" excursion.

It's early in the probe, but we may be looking at emerging evidence of a homosexual recruitment ring that operated on Capitol Hill. It's time to get beyond partisan politics and follow the evidence wherever it leads. Our media should not be intimidated by charges of "gay bashing." They must lead the way in getting to the bottom of this terrible abuse of power.

[GlasgowKiss]

Bluestar you are worse than republicans.

Yeah, i went there.