Skip to main content

The Mark Foley sex scandal has taken an incredible life on its own here. What started as a creepy sex scandal with suggestive emails and explicit IMs between a Republican congressman and a 16-year-old former page, has now developed into a huge GOP cover-up, denial, and PR-spin that is completely laughable. So I thought I would try to develop a timeline with the links and basic information that has come out on this scandal.  

Now I know that much of this information, and more, has already been reported through both Kos and the liberal and progressive blogsites.  And I'm sure I've left out a lot of information from this post.  This is just the highlights of the information coming out for the past five days.

So let's continue down into the fold.

This story first broke out on September 28, 2006 with the ABC News publication of Foley's emails with the 16-year old page. At that point, the scandal was focused on Foley and the email exchange, although it was even more creepy to find out that Foley was the Co-chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children Caucus. I personally didn't think much of the story--I figured that Foley would try to keep his repulsive behavior quiet from both political parties, and that he was just now found out.

On September 29, 2006, Foley resigns. What is more interesting is that we learn of even more details regarding explicit instant messages that Foley sent to the page. Later that day, ABC News published the IM exchange between Foley and the page.  Here is a PDF file of the IM exchange between Foley and the page.  Both Americablog and Raw Story has the Foley emails published.

It was also about this time that the first allegations of a GOP cover-up on the Foley scandal started surfacing. An Associated Press story in the San Francisco Chronicle revealed a number of details here. First, the page worked for Rep. Rodney Alexander. Alexander said that he learned of email exchanges 10 or 11 months ago and informed the parents. The parents didn't want to pursue the matter, so Alexander dropped it. Alexander also informed NRCC chairman Rep. Thomas Reynolds of the matter.

Also in the SF Chronicle article, Chairman of the Page Board, Rep. John Shimkus interviewed Foley, but determined that there were no indiscretions. Shimkus learned of the Foley emails in late 2005. House Speaker Dennis Hastert's office did not know of these allegations.

On September 30, 2006, the crap hit the fan.  The Washington Post reported that House Majority Leader John Boehner learned of Foley's email contacts last spring. Boehner then told the WaPost that he informed Hastert of Foley's allegations. Boehner then contacted the Post and said he couldn't remember when he told Hastert about Foley. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi demanded an investigation into the matter, but Boehner cut her off, saying that the Foley matter should be referred to the ethics committee. Roll Call then reported a story where NRCC chairman Rep. Tom Reynolds claimed that he informed Hastert of Foley in February of 2006.  Alexander then said that he learned of the Foley allegations through a reporter.  All of this boils down to this damning paragraph in a Roll Call story:

At least four Republican House Members, one senior GOP aide and a former top officer of the House were aware of the allegations about Foley that prompted the initial reporting regarding his e-mail contacts with a 16-year-old House page. They include: Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Tom Reynolds (N.Y.) and Reps. Rodney Alexander (R-La.) and John Shimkus (R-Ill.), as well as a senior aide to Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and former Clerk of the House Jeff Trandahl.

In addition, the Roll Call story also reported that Rep. Dale Kildee, the lone Democrat on the Page Board, was never told of Foley.

We also start to learn of the supposedly staff incompetence in Hastert's office.  Hastert's office released a statement where Alexander's chief of staff told Hastert staff member Tim Kennedy about the Foley matter. Kennedy then brought this matter up with his supervisor, Mike Stokke, Speaker Hastert's Deputy Chief of Staff. Hastert's staff talked with Alexander's staff about Foley, after which Shimkus' staff is brought into the matter. Hastert was never informed of Foley by his staff. In other words, Hastert's statement is nothing more than a game of musical staff chairs.

And how about another game of musical staff chairs?  According to Americablog, It appears that Tom Reynolds' chief of staff is Kirk Fordham, a former chief of staff and campaign director for Mike Foley. And it appears that Fordham went back to Foley to advise him of the scandal.  Remember, Alexander first told Reynolds of Foley back in late 2005.

The cover-up starts unraveling apart.  Reynolds released a statement saying that he told Hastert about Foley, just after Alexander informed Reynolds.  Hastert's statement doesn't deny that Reynolds informed the speaker of Foley, but rather that Hastert "does not explicitly recall this conversation, he has no reason to dispute Congressman Reynolds' recollection that he reported to him on the problem and its resolution."

The New York Times then reported that the young kids involved in the page program were told to stay away from Mark Foley. Even more, the Times reported that other pages have come forward with blatant IMs from Foley.

Sunday October 1, 2006.  It is a disaster.  According to the New York Times:

WASHINGTON, Sept. 30 -- 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.


Among those who became aware earlier this year of the fall 2005 communications 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.


Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers said Saturday that Congress and the public deserved a full report on Mr. Foley's dealings with the pages, who are high school students who serve as runners and perform other duties. The lawmakers said there should also be an inquiry into the leadership's knowledge of his activities and its response.

"Anyone who was involved in the chain of information should come forward and tell when they were told, what they were told and what they did with the information when they got it," said Representative Peter T. King, Republican of New York. Mr. King called it a "dark day" for Congress and said, "We need a full investigation."

Representative Christopher Shays, Republican of Connecticut, said any leader who had been aware of Mr. Foley's behavior and failed to take action should step down. "If they knew or should have known the extent of this problem, they should not serve in leadership," Mr. Shays said.

ABC News reported that the GOP staff had actually warned pages about Foley back in 2001. And what is more, it appeared that the warning went out to Republican pages--not to the Democratic pages.

The New York Daily News reported that Foley gave $100,000 to the National Republican Campaign Committee, whose chairman is Tom Reynolds.

Then there is this from The New York Times:

At the Justice Department, an official said that no investigation was under way but that the agency had "real interest" in examining the circumstances to see if any crimes were committed.

Then there is this blockbuster from The Washington Post:

With his statement, Reynolds, who is locked in a difficult reelection campaign, signaled he was unwilling to take the fall alone amid partisan attacks that were becoming increasingly vituperative.

Republican insiders said Reynolds spoke out because he was angry that Hastert appeared willing to let him take the blame for the party leadership's silence.

In other words, Reynolds and Hastert were having a major fight as to who was to take the blame for the Foley cover-up. With Reynolds in a tight election race, Reynolds is certainly not willing to commit political suicide for Hastert. The top Republican leadership starts to turn on each other.

October 2nd, 2006.  The feeding frenzy in this scandal continues as the GOP desperately tries to spin Foley away.  White House Counselor Dan Bartlett continued pushing the GOP spin by praising the "very aggressive" House leadership on the Foley scandal and claims that the White House opposes an independent investigation of the issue. White House press secretary Tony Snow dismissed the Foley scandal as nothing "more than simply naughty e-mails."

And yet, while the Republicans continue their spinning here, more devastating details arise. It appears that Foley was a major fundraiser for the NRCC. According to the NY Times:

Mr. Foley, who served on the House Ways and Means Committee, was a prolific fund-raiser. His campaign account had a balance of $2.7 million at the end of August, according to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission.

Carl Forti, the communications director for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said Sunday that the committee would gladly accept Mr. Foley's money or part of it to devote to House races. Mr. Foley already gave $100,000 to the committee in July, campaign records show, as part of the party's Battleground Program, to which members are asked to contribute.

"The money is in the control of Mr. Foley," Mr. Forti said. "Whatever he decides to do with it is up to him."

House Speaker Dennis Hastert finally called upon the Justice Department to investigate Foley. But even with Hastert's call for an investigation, Hastert still downplays the entire Foley issue. In his letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Hastert writes:

"As I am sure you are aware, there are two different and distinct communications at issue here. First, Mr. Foley sent an email to a former page of Representative Alexander in the fall of 2005. This email was determined to be "over friendly" by Representative Alexander's office but was not sexual in nature. Second, based on media reports, there is a different set of communications which were sexually explicit instant messages which Mr. Foley reportedly sent another former page or pages. These communications, of which no one in the House Leadership was aware to my knowledge, reportedly were sent sometime in 2003.

The GOP spin continues.

Meanwhile, Mark Foley has checked himself into an alcohol rehab clinic.

But the scandal continues on.  Now information is coming out that Foley's office may have tried to cut a deal with ABC to not publish to Foley story:

On Friday afternoon, a strategist for Rep. Mark Foley tried to cut a deal with ABC's Brian Ross.

The correspondent, who had dozens of instant messages that Foley sent to teenage House pages, had asked to interview the Florida Republican. Foley's former chief of staff said the congressman was quitting and that Ross could have that information exclusively if he agreed not to publish the raw, sexually explicit messages.

"I said we're not making any deals," Ross recalls. He says the Internet made the story possible, because on Thursday he posted a story on his ABC Web page, the Blotter, after obtaining one milder e-mail that Foley had sent a 16-year-old page, asking for a picture. Within two hours, former pages had e-mailed Ross and provided the salacious messages. The only question then, says Ross, was "whether this could be authenticated."

Americablog confirms that it was Kirk Forham who tried to cut the deal with Ross.

Finally, there is this ABC News story reporting that Foley actually sought a rendevous with the page:

In addition to explicit sexual language, former Congressman Mark Foley's Internet messages also include repeated efforts to get the underage recipient to rendezvous with him at night.

"I would drive a few miles for a hot stud like you," Foley said in one message obtained by ABC News.

The FBI says it has opened a "preliminary investigation" of Foley's e-mails. Federal law enforcement officials say attempts by Foley to meet in person could constitute the necessary evidence for a federal charge of "soliciting for sex" with a minor on the Internet.

In another message, Foley, using the screen name Maf54, appears to describe having been together with the teen in San Diego.

Maf54: I miss you lots since san diego.
Teen:   ya I cant wait til dc
Maf54: :)
Teen:   did you pick a night for dinner
Maf54: not yet...but likely Friday
Teen:   ok...ill plan for Friday then
Maf54: that will be fun

The messages also show the teen is, at times, uncomfortable with Foley's aggressive approach.

Maf54: I want to see you
Teen:   Like I said not til feb...then we will go to dinner
Maf54: and then what happens
Teen:  we eat...we drink...who knows...hang out...late into the night
Maf54: and
Teen:  I dunno
Maf54: dunno what
Teen:  hmmm I have the feeling that you are fishing not sure what I would be comfortable with...well see

Foley resigned Friday after ABC News questioned him about the Internet messages.

This is the timeline of the Foley scandal that I can construct using a number of internet sources.  This is certainly not a complete timeline--there has been so much information, speculation and analysis of this scandal over the past five days.  But it is certainly a start here.  Big hat tips to Americablog, Think Progress, and Crooks and Liars for links and background information on this posting.

And if you have some information on the Foley scandal that you would like to include here, please post it in the comments with links to the original source stories or your own diaries. Perhaps we can create our own information clearing house that we could all use in our future postings on this issue.  Because it will not go away for the next month.

Update I: It appears the Chicago Tribune is reporting more suggestive emails from Foley:

WASHINGTON -- A former House page said Sunday that in 2003 he saw sexually suggestive e-mails that Rep. Mark Foley had sent to another former page.

Patrick McDonald, 21, now a senior at Ohio State University, said he eventually learned of "three or four" pages from his 2001-2002 class who were sent such messages.

McDonald said he remembered saying at a 2003 page reunion, "If this gets out, it will destroy him."

Former page Matthew Loraditch said Sunday he has known for years about the "creepy" messages three 2002 classmates received from the then-Florida representative. He said Foley sent them after the boys had finished the House program. Each began innocuously but took a turn in tone, said Loraditch, a senior at Towson University.

If I find more information, I'll continue adding to this post.

Update II: The Washington Post is now reporting that the FBI knew about Foley's emails since July:

The FBI acknowledged yesterday that it did not begin an investigation in late July after receiving copies of e-mails sent in 2005 by then-Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) to a Louisiana teenager -- messages that troubled the boy's parents.

Officials from the liberal-leaning group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington said yesterday that they received copies of the Louisiana e-mails on July 21 and turned them over to the FBI the same day. Melanie Sloan, the group's executive director, said she spoke with a special agent in the Washington field office, and she questioned yesterday why the FBI did not investigate Foley weeks ago.

An FBI official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing, said the field office concluded that the e-mails "did not rise to the level of criminal activity." The bureau announced Sunday that it would begin a preliminary investigation into Foley's more explicit electronic exchanges with teenagers.

Hat tip to Scout Finch for bringing up this story.

Update III: The Washington Times is now calling for House Speaker Dennis Hastert to resign his speakership position--and not his house seat (Hat tip to Meteor Blades on this one).

Originally posted to Eric Hopp on Mon Oct 02, 2006 at 06:30 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar here (14+ / 0-)

    It took me much of the day trying to organize this post:)

    •  Over the weekend, I had plenty of trouble (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      GussieFN, peace voter, Elise, uniongal

      keeping up with the Foley scandal.  There was so much information coming out, so fast and furious, that it was hard enough for me to comprehend the story--let alone analyze it, when new revelations made my own analysis obsolete.  I figured a number of people here needed some sort of timeline to keep track of everything that was going on so quickly.

  •  Well done, Eric (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    peace voter, Eric Hopp, uniongal

    We need more reference-laden recaps like this. Please keep it up, and thanks.

    "Lash those traitors and conservatives with the pen of gall and wormwood. Let them feel -- no temporising!" - Andrew Jackson to Francis Preston Blair, 1835

    by Ivan on Mon Oct 02, 2006 at 06:34:25 PM PDT

  •  Excellent work, Eric. Did you know that in the (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    peace voter, Eric Hopp, uniongal, kath25

    past few hours Brian Ross said to Charlie Gibson that they are hearing from former pages about other members of Congress. Ross was careful in his phraseology, but he said that so far Foley is the only documented case of harassment  (these are not his literal words, just my summary of them). You can see the quote at Atrios and at Media Matters and undoubtedly at ABC.

    The 'projection rule': Whatever Republicans accuse Democrats of doing, that is exactly what they are doing themselves.

    by lecsmith on Mon Oct 02, 2006 at 06:40:04 PM PDT

    •  I've heard rumors of other pages getting emails (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      and IMs from Foley that were somewhat explicit, but--as you've said--nobody is coming out with the new documentation.  Both the New York Times and ABC News alludes to this speculation.  But it is still not confirmed.

  •  Thankyou. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I'm still confused, but that's all part of how they work it, I'm convinced.

    a hope that may come close to despair

    by epppie on Mon Oct 02, 2006 at 06:42:42 PM PDT

    •  The real confustion here is the contradictions (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      uniongal, epppie

      The GOP has been spinning it one way or the other in trying to hide this cover-up.  Now that this cover-up has been exposed, the top GOP leaders are trying to dismiss it by claiming that they didn't know about it.  That is why you're seeing the political infighting between Boehner, Reynolds, Shimkus, and Hastert.  Nobody wants to be the fall guy for this scandal.  And the more they try to spin their excuses, the more implicated in this scandal they become.

  •  Don't forget about 9.05.06! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Hopp, uniongal, kath25

    How many noticed or took seriously the September 5th comment posted right here on daily kos by WHInternNow?

    The Real Problem With Foley (0 / 0)

    It's not that he's gay. It's that he constantly hits on underage interns on The Hill. You guys talk about an "open secret" well Foley's eye for the young boys in the White House and around the Capitol is what has the Republican bosses scared to death. It's just wrong that this guy can hit on young boys and still be in the leadership.

    by WHInternNow on Tue Sep 05, 2006 at 05:48:09 PM PDT

    Even though the comment went by virtually unnoticed, I think the date (and the post) is particularly significant.

    On Sunday, September 24, 2006 WHInternNowA publishes a diary called Congressman Mark Foley Emails to Intern.  The diary provides links to stopsexpredators.blogspot that published difficult to read copies of the first Foley/page emails on that same day.

    Today, October 2, 2006 Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) issued a press release calling for an investigation of the FBI for failing to initiate an investigation in July of this year when CREW contacted the FBI and furnished the Bureau with the crop of disturbing emails which was later published by ABC News.

    I think that it's also important to include in any timeline the fact that Republican pages had been warned about Foley years ago.

    Today, on Hardball with Chris Matthews The Hill's AB Stoddard indicated that Foley's inapproriate behavior had been widely known in Republican circles for some time - she also said that he had never been known to have a drinking problem.


    •  That Diary (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      peace voter, Eric Hopp, uniongal

      It's worth a look at that diary from a few days ago. Note how some of the original comments are somewhat negative, and suggest that the diary writer is a troll. (I am excepting the actual-troll comments, of course.)

      I don't have a solution, and I don't know how a website of this size can effectively deal with vetting the volume of information that goes on here, but I can't help but wonder if there might be a way to use this platform to help people come forward?

      •  WHInternNow (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Meteor Blades, uniongal, kath25

        WHInternNow is self described as a white house intern - it's really too bad that that individual was met with so much hostility here at daily kos.

        I particularly appeciated the following comment from ActivistGuy:

        A fact is a fact (9+ / 0-)

        Recommended by: laurak, peace voter, realitybased, lizah, annefrank, palachia, cowgirl, The Sinistral, awakenow
        and doesn't change its nature depending on whether you have corroboration to suit your satisfaction.  

        This is one of the reasons being a whistle-blower is so difficult.  Even those with an interest in your information and the ability to do something with it are prone to treat you like dirt.  It's very frustrating.

        Something we as bloggers need to learn.  As the blogs become an established and permanent part of the information flow, as with any other information nexus, people will plant leaks on  the blogs.  They needn't immediately be accepted as true, but one should either actively research or at least file away such posts rather than trying to drive off the source.  If bloggers are to be "citizen journalists", that means adopting journalistic practices.  In this case, kossacks acted like MSM journalists that blew something off because it wasn't in our existing narrative.  A true journalist follows where the facts lead and is not in a rush to judgement.

        I smell sulphur

        by ActivistGuy on Sun Oct 01, 2006 at 10:46:04 PM PDT


        •  I'm sorry he got so much hostility on Kos (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          The references in his posting were certainly interesting, although unconfirmable.  This was certainly a possible tip for anyone to investigate further on.  

          The problem with bloggers are that they are not trained as journalists.  We are not trained in investigative techniques, confirmation of stories, nurturing sources and such.  We're not trained to sniff out the various leaks for the true nuggets of information, from all the crap that can pile up on the postings.  We need to be trained in those journalistic practices.

    •  I've included the GOP warnings of Foley to (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      peace voter, uniongal

      their pages, and the lack of warnings to the Democratic pages since 2001.  I didn't know about the CREW press release--will have to look into that.  

      This Kos posting by WHInternNowA is especially interesting, considering it came out almost a week before ABC News published the Foley emails.  It is also interesting that WHInternNowA has only posted this one diary on Mark Foley, with this one link to a blogsite that has been up for only four months and has a total of 10 posts?  In addition, this WHInternNowA has only written one comment on an open-thread post, which links to this Stopsexpredators blogsite.  I don't know what to say about this individual--I don't want to dismiss his comments, any more than I want to praise him.  But I do find this twist very interesting because it tells me that someone wanted to get this information on Foley out, at about this time just before the elections.

      Beyondo98 wrote this post which included the WHInternNowA's comment.  While Beyondo98 doesn't reference Foley's sexual interest in minors, he does bring up the fact that Foley is gay and that Democratic challenger Tim Mahoney is attacking Foley because of Foley's sexual orientation.  Foley's sexual orientation is not an issue here, in fact it could be that Beyondo98's goal was to both defend Foley on whatever this "dirty little secret" was, while at the same time attack Mahoney on the grounds of "character assassination" of Foley.  But even in this posting, we still get an early reference to Foley's sexual interest in minors.  

      •  CREW, Lawsuits, Corruption, and Who Knew What (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eric Hopp

        Yeah, CREW is suing them and wanted the FBI to investigate the case. Gotta' love Melanie Sloan and the great work she does. A friend of mine pointed out this diary to me and the one by Winterinternnow and the diary you just linked to, and I was shocked by the nature of the comments on those diaries. I would say a lot of people are probably feeling like they've got foot in mouth syndrome right now.

        I think another big part to this story which hasn't been fully looked at yet is did the FBI have any kind of political pressure put on it to ignore CREW's suit? It would not surprise me if they did have someone put their foot down on them, just like the SEC is probably being pressured not to do anything about Bill Frist right now. Poppy Bush got away with it to keep them from investigating Chimpie over his dirty dealings with his failed oil comany Arbusto where he did his mini-Enron deal and ripped off stock holders for millions. The FBI and the SEC are subject to the guys at the top making life hell for them if they don't do their bidding.

        I think the posts by the intern raises the question of who knew what when on all sides of the board, and what did Foley's opponent know? Did he think the rumors were just about him being gay, or did everyone know about him stalking the kids?

        I think that's fairly important because I think Hastert is desperately looking for ANYONE else to lay blame on besides himself for this mess, and he'll gladly try to put it on the Dems too if he can get away with it.

        The real question though is who actually knew anything you could PROVE, and I don't blame anyone for not speaking out if they didn't have the facts and something they could substantiate. Look at how people here were attacked for bringing up his sexual orientation on this site. I have to wonder though if all of the members of Congress knew about CREW's law suit, or if it was only brought up to them once this thing really blew up. The only one that I think would have known about the suit was the man running against Foley, Tim Mahoney. I've got to wonder if they knew about CREW's suit, and if they did, why they weren't using it to campaign against him before? Question would be, does he have horrid people working for him who didn't catch this, or were they afraid it had no merit and better to shut up and let it run it's course if it did?

        •  Interesting questions here. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jlynne, uniongal

          We actually have two issues here that really haven't been explained yet.  The first is the CREW lawsuit, and the FBI's lack of involvement in this case.  If CREW had gained access to these emails in July of 2006 and passed them on to the FBI, then why didn't the FBI even bother investigating them?  This dovetails right into your own comment regarding the possibility of political pressure being forced on the FBI by politically powerful individuals--Alberto Gonzales?  President Bush?  Dennis Hastert?  Karl Rove?  Was the FBI pressured to lay off the CREW case?  We don't know yet.

          The second issue is really a question of who submitted these Foley emails and IMs to ABC News?  Someone gave this information to ABC sometime late this year--call it late August or September for example--where the information would be published just before the elections.  Did CREW send them to ABC?  Did someone over at the FBI leaked them?  How about the 16-year-old page, who was involved in the Foley scandal? Remember, the Republican pages knew of Foley's deviant behavior back in 2001--we've had five years where this stuff could have come out by any former page.  Tim Mahoney's campaign?  That is a real biggie, since such revelations would destroy Foley's career and give the FL-16 seat to Mahoney on a platter.  Because if it was revealed that Mahoney's campaign was the original source of the ABC News story on Foley, then you can bet that Tim Mahoney's campaign will become the Holy Grail of an excuse for Hastert to lay the entire Foley scandal on the Democrats.

          So while the Democrats are demanding investigations into the GOP cover-up, they should also be worried that there are no Foley skeletons hiding in their own closets.    

          •  From what I read (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Eric Hopp

            The ABC stories and the ones who broke the story said it was the interns who had this happen to them who wrote to them directly and who told about the e-mails and IM's just like they did to CREW and it was not CREW who tipped them off. The question would be is is the same group that saw the FBI ignoring the CREW suit,and they decided to go to the press instead, or was it someone else? I will take a huge guess here and say I'd bet it's the same group. If they thought they'd get some help from CREW and the FBI, and then saw the suit going no where, the next place they would turn to in a logical sense would be the press. I'm guessing here and have no facts to go on, just common sense. We'll see if that plays itself out to be true.

            •  Typo (0+ / 0-)

              Should have said is it, not is is.

            •  Well, this leads to the next question (0+ / 0-)

              Was it the 16-year-old intern who gave this story to ABC News?  The emails and AOL instant messages had to have come from the 16-year-old's computer.  It may not have been that 16-year-old intern--it could have been one of his friends who gave the story to ABC, or the parents.  Either way, the information had to be pulled from that 16-year-old's computer.  With the AOL software, all IMs are saved as a TXT file in an AOL subfolder on the computer.  It is not too difficult to find the message, if you know where to look.

      •  I think you've got it wrong (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eric Hopp

        "Beyondo98 ... does bring up the fact that Foley is gay and that Democratic challenger Tim Mahoney is attacking Foley because of Foley's sexual orientation."

        — Eric Hopp

        Beyondo98 accuses Mahoney of attacking Foley because of his sexual orientation - Beyondo98 doesn't offer any evidence that actually supports the accusation and comes across as a concern troll.


        •  I'll accept your reasoning. (0+ / 0-)

          Beyondo98's post is especially skimpy and disjointed.    And yes, Beyondo doesn't even include any evidence to support his postings.  It certainly is a possibility that Beyondo is a concerned troll, trying to stir up some controversy on Kos, so that he could use it against the Democrats.

  •  Great Work (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Hopp, uniongal

    You should check it against to make sure they haven't missed anything.

    Paper Ballots Counted By People!

    by Rupert on Mon Oct 02, 2006 at 07:55:33 PM PDT

  •  This Timeline Will Go On and ON (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eric Hopp

    The other shoe is about to drop in Florida.

    Republican state Attorney General and R nominee for Governor , Charlie Crist, was a roomate of Mark Foley's while both served in the Florida Legislature.  It has also been posted on the St. Petersburg Times Buzz Blog that "Every one who knew Mark, knew he liked the young FSU football players." So, the question yet to be answered is what did Charlie Crist know about Mark Foley when they were roomates in Tallahassee?  The next question is will Charlie Crist, the state Attorney General and top law enforcement officer aggressively investigate his former roomate? And what might be discovered in Crist's own closet if he does?

    There is sure to be more to come on this story.

    You can't govern if you can't win.

    by gatordem on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 04:40:09 AM PDT

    •  You're sure this is the other shoe dropping? (0+ / 0-)

      We've had more shoes dropping on this scandal than Imelda Marcos has in her closet.  

      You certainly do bring up an interesting conjecture here about the relationship between Crist and Foley.  If Crist does become the next Florida AG, will Crist be willing to investigage Foley?  Will Crist recuse himself from the Foley investigation?  

      The way this story is developing, if Crist does become Florida's AG, he may not have much choice but to investigate Foley.  Otherwise, he gets into political trouble with explaining to a hungry press why Florida's top cop should not investigate a former roomate involved in soliciting sex from a minor.  If he recuses himself and hands the investigation over to the deputy attorney general, then that is understandable--he had a personal relationship with Foley back in college.  Such a relationship could bias his objectivity in this investigation.  But if Crist refuses to allow the Florida law enforcement to investigate Foley, then Crist certainly risks his own political career, where the press would suspect that he has something to hide in all of this.  

      •  I Probably Wasn't Clear (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Eric Hopp, DSPS owl

        Crist is currently Florida AG.  He is also the R nominee for Governor.

        You can't govern if you can't win.

        by gatordem on Tue Oct 03, 2006 at 09:05:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  My mistake--reading too fast (0+ / 0-)

          and not comprehending.  But even if Crist does get elected as governor, or loses and goes back to being the attorney general, he is still stuck in this sticky situation with Foley. He still has to choose between ordering a state investigation into Foley, recusing himself and allowing an investigation take place, or refuse to allow such an investigation to take place--incurring a press feeding frenzied investigation into his own relationship with Foley.  Even if Crist is elected as governor, he is also stuck with these choices in consulting whoever the latest Florida AG will be after the election.

  •  Karma for Monica (0+ / 0-)

    Payback's a beeyotch!
    Hey Republicans... here's what you get when you condemn/persecute another imperfect human for his frailties and foibles.  It comes back and bites you in the arse even harder than you bit.  I'm sure Bill Clinton has got to be enjoying this privately.  At least Bill chose to have relations with a consenting, of age/adult woman.
    What hypocrites those Repugs are!  Can't wait to see the Republican House of cards fall.  They're toast and deservedly so. (sorry, but I can't contain my glee at seeing these hypocrites get what they deserve... is that so bad?)

  •  Sorry, Eric H. (0+ / 0-)

    I've only read the 1st five paragraphs and am disappointed.  Already your first sentence says that the creepy e-mails and the explicit IMs were aimed at the same kid, and you repeat that several times.  Not so.

    Then you say that Rep. Alexander informed his (former) page's parents about the e-mails.  That's quite backwards.  The parents of the 16-yr-old Louisiana boy who received the e-mails contacted Alexander (in Nov. 05, I think) to ask him to tell Foley to stop bothering their son.  They didn't want any fuss, just wanted it stopped.

    Now I'll go back and read the rest - skeptically.

    The Republicans are defunding, not defending, America.

    by DSPS owl on Wed Oct 04, 2006 at 05:21:38 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site