ABC on Gerry Studds: Only 'A Strong Sense of Loyalty' And Forgiveness From Voters

[Dr Grump]

But nooooooooo, the Dems. had to go and try to score some political points with it.

Because if the shoe had been on the other foot the Repubs wouldn't have done a thing, right?

 

[musicman]

Absolutely. His emails were dealt with at the time. Somehow they weren't as "bad" as this current business. You see the IM's as some Dem-inspired, left-wing conspiracy abetted by a so-called liberal media? Having not seen the contents of either, how do you know the emails and IM's were not as bad as each other? You don't know, but in your foaming-at-the-mouth desire to back this piece of shit, you ASSUME the former were not at bad as the LATTER. And you also accuse, with absolutely NO credible evidence, these mystery Dems of holding onto this info - and therefore knowingly supporting "paedophile" behaviour, while happily giving the GoP a free pass on how they handled the emails. Yeah, I'm aware, and have grasped the significance: being that if a scumbag Repub sends sleazy messages to young teenage boys it's more important to shift the blame to the messangers - whoever they may be - than lay the blame at the feet of the person who thoroughly deserves it.

I've seen the e-mails AND the IMs. The Republican leadership acted promptly and appropriately on the information it had, which was the e-mails. Additionaly, Tampa and Miami newspapers had this same info, and did not deem it sufficiently alarming to run news stories. And, apparently, the FBI - with the same info - judged it unworthy of pursuing. The information in the e-mails was, then - clearly - innocuous. A stern warning to Foley from the leadership was appropriate and - by all indications GIVEN to leadership - sufficient.

What were they supposed to do in regard to IMs they knew nothing about? Some of those IMs go back THREE YEARS, Dr Grump. SOMEBODY knew about them. Don't you find the timing of all this rather...CONVENIENT for a certain Party? Don't you find the co-ordinated efforts of ABC, the Democrat Party, and CREW a bit UNCANNY? Doesn't it beg the question, "Who stood to GAIN from all this?" Doesn't it additionally beg the question, "If Foley was a danger to minor children, why wasn't this information reported IMMEDIATELY?"

 

[Stephanie]

Because if the shoe had been on the other foot the Repubs wouldn't have done a thing, right?

Probably Not....

But it's in the FBI hands now....I bet there are some people going out and stocking up on Depends underwear......

 

[Dr Grump]

What were they supposed to do in regard to IMs they knew nothing about? Some of those IMs go back THREE YEARS, Dr Grump. SOMEBODY knew about them. Don't you find the timing of all this rather...CONVENIENT for a certain Party? Don't you find the co-ordinated efforts of ABC, the Democrat Party, and CREW a bit UNCANNY? Doesn't it beg the question, "Who stood to GAIN from all this?" Doesn't it additionally beg the question, "If Foley was a danger to minor children, why wasn't this information reported IMMEDIATELY?"

Well I haven't seen either, but I'll take your word about the contents. The GoP should have given Foley the flick then and there and not dicked around.

I don't find the fact that ABC and the Dems are doing what they are doing, and I doubt it is concert. Could be, but I doubt. And if Foley was a danger, all the more reason to get rid of Foley in the first place.

I just find it weird that every time a repub fucks up, within about 10 minutes we're talking about how it is the Dem's fault..

 

[Dr Grump]

Probably Not....

But it's in the FBI hands now....I bet there are some people going out and stocking up on Depends underwear......

Of course they would have...at the drop of a hat....

 

[musicman]

Well I haven't seen either, but I'll take your word about the contents. The GoP should have given Foley the flick then and there and not dicked around.

No - that would have been excessive, given the situation. A boy felt uncomfortable about Foley asking him - in an e-mail - for a photo. That was all. His parents made it clear that they did not want the matter pursued further or publicized, as long as Foley ceased all contact - which, under the stern direction of leadership, he did. There were no further complaints. Leadership acted promptly, firmly, and effectively.

I don't find the fact that ABC and the Dems are doing what they are doing, and I doubt it is concert.Could be, but I doubt.

The Justice Dept. may or may not find collusion in this specific instance (CREW's involvement, I suspect, will be a bit more cut-and-dried), but I think the court of public opinion is going to judge ABC harshly. America won't require proof of bias in a court of law to turn the channel in disgust - we don't have to.

And if Foley was a danger, all the more reason to get rid of Foley in the first place.

How could they have made such a determination on the strength of the e-mail incident? You can't fault them for failing to act on information they didn't have.

I just find it weird that every time a repub fucks up, within about 10 minutes we're talking about how it is the Dem's fault..

You're certainly entitled to your perceptions and opinions, Dr Grump. But, I honestly don't know how you arrive at that, hanging out at USMB. We savage ALL fuck-ups. But, the real fuck-ups in this case appear to be the Democrats - sorry!

 

[Annie]

This won't 'save' Foley, but might help Hastert. Certainly causes problems for the democrats:

http://www.drudgereport.com/page.htm

 

[musicman]

This won't 'save' Foley, but might help Hastert. Certainly causes problems for the democrats:

http://www.drudgereport.com/page.htm

LOL - and now we've got ABC trying to bolster its position with some uncannily convenient "new cases":

Link doesn't work - jillian's post #155 inrepresentative in florida resigning; Merged (Politics)

 

[Dr Grump]

No - that would have been excessive, given the situation. A boy felt uncomfortable about Foley asking him - in an e-mail - for a photo. That was all. His parents made it clear that they did not want the matter pursued further or publicized, as long as Foley ceased all contact - which, under the stern direction of leadership, he did. There were no further complaints. Leadership acted promptly, firmly, and effectively.

You're certainly entitled to your perceptions and opinions, Dr Grump. But, I honestly don't know how you arrive at that, hanging out at USMB. We savage ALL fuck-ups. But, the real fuck-ups in this case appear to be the Democrats - sorry!

He asked for a photo of the kid? C'mon, you gotta admit that is at the very least a little creepy. He shoulda gone then.

I see Dem savaging conservative fuck-ups and vice versa on this board. I don't think the Dems have fucked up at all. Hypocrisy all round. That's politics I guess. When all is said and done, Foley is a arsehole, and he shoulda been cut loose. No second chances for that kind of situation. As this only coming out now, those pages could have gone to many other sources, and I doubt it would have been kept under wraps for so long, which leads me to believe it is probably more recent than you think.

You can't fault them on information they never had.

True.

 

[Stephanie]

Oh for crying out loud.....

Now we can't even ask someone for a picture and it's considered creepy....

Hey Kat, I've know you for a couple of yrs now....Could I have a picture of you.....

But Please don't find this request Creepy.......I swear I would just like to see what you look like........I'm really, really, REALLY not into women.....

 

[Dr Grump]

Oh for crying out loud.....

Now we can't even ask someone for a picture and it's considered creepy....

Hey Kat, I've know you for a couple of yrs now....Could I have a picture of you.....

But Please don't find this request Creepy.......I swear I would just like to see what you look like........I'm really, really, REALLY not into women.....

So a member of congress asks for a picture of your 16 year old son and you're Ok with that? Why would a member of congress want a picture of a 16 year old he doesn't even know that well? Put it on his mantelpiece? His sideboard? In a photo album? Hate to break it to you Steph, but his own party thought it inappropriate and acted accordingly - let alone the kid's parents....

 

[musicman]

He asked for a photo of the kid? C'mon, you gotta admit that is at the very least a little creepy. He shoulda gone then.

And then you, jillian, and every other liberal on this board would have howled like bloodhounds in the "GOP Gay Purge" thread. I saw the e-mail - there was nothing lewd about it. The kid just didn't dig it (great instincts, apparently; good job, mom and dad!), said so, and that was the end of it. As badly as you want to, you can't blame Republican leadership for not being mindreaders.

I see Dem savaging conservative fuck-ups and vice versa on this board. I don't think the Dems have fucked up at all. Hypocrisy all round. That's politics I guess. When all is said and done, Foley is a arsehole, and he shoulda been cut loose. No second chances for that kind of situation. As this only coming out now, those pages could have gone to many other sources, and I doubt it would have been kept under wraps for so long, which leads me to believe it is probably more recent than you think.

We shall see, my friend. It's going to be an interesting month. Personally, I think the bloodbath is going to make Rathergate seem like a tea party.

 

[Stephanie]

So a member of congress asks for a picture of your 16 year old son and you're Ok with that? Why would a member of congress want a picture of a 16 year old he doesn't even know that well? Put it on his mantelpiece? His sideboard? In a photo album? Hate to break it to you Steph, but his own party thought it inappropriate and acted accordingly - let alone the kid's parents....

Sorry to break it to you dear, but I do believe he did know the kid....
He asked for a picture because he hadn't seen him in a couple of yrs.....

The parent's did ask after that exchange for the emails to stop and he was TOLD to knock it off...
And also the parents asked that no more action be taken, but look where it is NOW.....

 

[Dr Grump]

And then you, jillian, and every other liberal on this board would have howled like bloodhounds in the "GOP Gay Purge" thread. I saw the e-mail - there was nothing lewd about it. The kid just didn't dig it (great instincts, apparently; good job, mom and dad!), said so, and that was the end of it. As badly as you want to, you can't blame Republican leadership for not being mindreaders.

Naw, not I. Not my style in that regard. Plus I'm not that liberal. The actual act of gay sex between men makes me wanna barf, my objection to that whole thing is all about individual liberty as opposed to the act itself. If the guy is gay, who cares. If he's trying to pick up teenagers that's a whole new thing IMO.

We shall see, my friend. It's going to be an interesting month. Personally, I think the bloodbath is going to make Rathergate seem like a tea party.

It will depend on which political party puts the best spin on it.

Anyway, have to get this ugly mug off to the land of nod. Need my beauty sleep.......big time!

 

[musicman]

Naw, not I. Not my style in that regard. Plus I'm not that liberal. The actual act of gay sex between men makes me wanna barf, my objection to that whole thing is all about individual liberty as opposed to the act itself. If the guy is gay, who cares. If he's trying to pick up teenagers that's a whole new thing IMO.



It will depend on which political party puts the best spin on it.

Anyway, have to get this ugly mug off to the land of nod. Need my beauty sleep.......big time!

Great, lively discussion - thanks!

 

[Annie]

LOL - and now we've got ABC trying to bolster its position with some uncannily convenient "new cases":

Link doesn't work - jillian's post #155 inrepresentative in florida resigning; Merged (Politics)

Sorry, it works for me, but here it is, from the Drudge Report:

CLAIM: FILTHY FOLEY ONLINE CHATS WERE PAGE 'PRANK GONE AWRY'
**Update**

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, said he goaded an unwitting 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.

The primary source, an ally of Edmund, adamantly proclaims that the former page is not a homosexual. The prank scenario was confirmed by a second associate of Edmund. Both are fearful that their political careers will be affected if they are publicly brought into the investigation.

The prank scenario only applies to the Edmund IM sessions and does not necessarily apply to any other exchanges between the former congressman and others.

The news come on the heels that Edmund has hired former Timothy McVeigh criminal attorney, Stephen Jones.

Late Thursday, Jones stongly denied the exchanges with Foley were a prank by the former page. Jones said, "There is not any aspect of this matter that is a practical joke nor should anyone treat it that way."

But those close to Jordan Edmund stand by their accounts of what Jordan told them.

Developing...

 

[Stephanie]

Good nite Dr.Grump, sleep tight watch out for those bed bugs, they have a tendency to bite........

I'll agree with MM...Good lively discussion......

 

[Annie]

Oh for crying out loud.....

Now we can't even ask someone for a picture and it's considered creepy....

Hey Kat, I've know you for a couple of yrs now....Could I have a picture of you.....

But Please don't find this request Creepy.......I swear I would just like to see what you look like........I'm really, really, REALLY not into women.....

Anything for you, sweetie!

 

[musicman]

Sorry, it works for me, but here it is, from the Drudge Report:

I'm sorry, Kathianne - I should have made myself clearer - jillian's link didn't work.

 

[Stephanie]

Anything for you, sweetie!

Thank you, Honey bunch.....