Watchdog Group Disputes FBI's Claims on E-Mails

[Stephanie]

Oh Oh......Shit meet fan.......:nine:
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 6, 2006; Page A04

The watchdog group that first provided the FBI with suspicious e-mails from then-Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) said yesterday that FBI and Justice Department officials are attempting to cover up their inaction in the case by making false claims about the group.

Law enforcement officials said the allegations by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) are without merit, and they stood by allegations that the group had refused to provide some information to the FBI.

The dispute is the latest controversy this week for CREW, a liberal-leaning group that has come under attack from House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and other Republicans because it has received money from a foundation funded by liberal financier George Soros.

CREW held a news conference Monday to announce that in July it had provided the FBI suspicious e-mails between Foley and a former House page. The group criticized the bureau for not taking more aggressive action and asked Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine to investigate the FBI's handling of the case.

Law enforcement officials said then that the e-mails did not provide enough evidence of a possible crime to warrant a full investigation. In the e-mails, Foley praises the physical attributes of one page and asks another teenager for his picture.

In subsequent days, unidentified Justice and FBI officials told reporters that the e-mails provided by CREW were heavily redacted and that the group refused to provide unedited versions to the FBI. One law enforcement official -- speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation -- also told The Washington Post the FBI believed that CREW may have received the e-mails as early as April and that the group refused to tell the FBI how they were obtained.

Melanie Sloan, CREW's executive director, said copies of the original e-mails she sent to an FBI agent show those assertions to be wrong. Sloan said the agent called to confirm receipt of the e-mails and to ask if one of the parties was Foley.

Sloan said the group sent unedited e-mails to the FBI because "we wanted them to commence an investigation. We're sort of outraged that they're saying anything differently." The group has asked Fine's office to look into the FBI's assertions.

Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse declined to comment on that issue but defended the FBI's handling of the original e-mails: "The e-mails, while inappropriate, did not contain a criminal predicate to allow the FBI to move forward in an investigation."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/05/AR2006100501657.html

 

[UnAmericanYOU]

"Liberal leaning"? For CREW?

Only the English should much an understatement. That front group of Geoge Soros and his "progressive secularist" allies (Hi, ABC News!), can just go crew themselves:

What's CREW?

What is CREW?


Theoretically, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington is a 501 C 3 corporation ( non profit) organization which purports to serve a non-partisan public watchdog purpose. A view of its ‘brag list’ of 61 Legal Actions reveals precisely one involving a Democrat, giving the lie to the non-partisan claim and placing CREW in the position of requiring a thorough review by the IRS regarding its claim to be serving any public interest other than the advancement of Democratic Party interests through subterfuge.

The single Democrat is William Jefferson of Louisiana and CREW did not find his conduct unethical until after his bribe taking was confirmed by a Department of Justice plea agreement reached with the man who had bribed him.

CREW is currently very publicly involved in the Foley scandal by claiming what amounts to a “cover up” in the FBI’s decision that further investigation of rather innocuous email messages to a page from Louisiana was unwarranted

There is a cover up involved to be sure, but it involves the unethical attempt by CREW to improperly influence the November election by drumming up a scandal where none existed. Had CREW any consideration whatsoever for ethics, they might have brought this matter to a head in June, when of one their myriad slime sources fed them copies of the emails.

What kept these keepers of ethics from referring another of their half baked complaints to the House Ethics Committee rather than to the FBI? There are only two employees at CREW, according to their 990 IRS reports and both of them purport to have long histories in the legal profession as members of the Department of Justice. Given that, one might expect at least a mediocre understanding that the emails constituted evidence of absolutely nothing that warranted FBI involvement.

If the CREW crew have a moment to spare perhaps they could use it to begin an investigation of the incredible lapse of ethical judgment shown by ABC News in rushing to print the salacious content of IM’s thoughtfully provided to them by people who had to have known that they were malicious pranks generated by teenagers who thought that teasing gays was a sport.

They might even question the ethics involved in ABC not having given Foley an opportunity to answer as to whether the IMs in question had even been written by him and if so, whether they had been doctored as part of the ‘prank’.

Saved IMs are simply text files which can be modified using any text editor. There is no way to verify their validity short of both sender and recipient acknowledging that they are legitimate. Of course, that would require an understanding that the two women who suck up forty percent of CREWs expenses as salary, Melanie Sloan and Naomi Seligman, actually knew what the word ‘ethics’ means.

No evidence exists that would confirm that speculation. The left wing Soros affiliates who provide the vast majority of the hopefully soon to be non-deductible donations which support CREW should consider requesting that Sloan and Seligman enroll in a beginning undergraduate course in ethics prior to their continuing their abuse of the word.

http://www.americanthinker.com/comments.php?comments_id=6290

Soros may be wealthier, but Rove's smarter IMO. He is everywhere.

 

[musicman]

You know, the more I think about it - George Soros' won-lost record in American politics is actually pretty dismal. Maybe we ought to put THIS fucker in charge of amnesty for illegals - the problem would probably disappear overnight.

The Dems' motto for '08 should be, "PLEASE don't support us any more, George - we want to LIVE!"

 

[Stephanie]

Foley should definitely be gone..

But this whole thing, the way it broke and all......Had a lot of stink on it.....

Time will tell..

 

[Redhots]

You forgot to bold the parts you didn't like.

Melanie Sloan, CREW's executive director, said copies of the original e-mails she sent to an FBI agent show those assertions to be wrong. Sloan said the agent called to confirm receipt of the e-mails and to ask if one of the parties was Foley.

Sloan said the group sent unedited e-mails to the FBI because "we wanted them to commence an investigation. We're sort of outraged that they're saying anything differently." The group has asked Fine's office to look into the FBI's assertions.

But thanks for posting it none the less, its one of less talked abot aspects of this whole thing. The FBI being informed about this and sitting on it. Very, very short list of people with enough pull to restrain FBI watchdogs. Now that its public though they spring into action...

 

[Stephanie]

You forgot to bold the parts you didn't like.



But thanks for posting it none the less, its one of less talked about aspects of this whole thing. The FBI being informed about this and sitting on it. Very, very short list of people with enough pull to restrain FBI watchdogs. Now that its public though they spring into action...

They we given the emails....They didn't think there enough of the salacious material in those, to justify them getting involved....
Nobody saw those IMs, until last Friday when ABC broke the story....

That's why the Democrats accusing Hastert of all this is just as it is.....Bullshit. He didn't see these Ims either until this Past Friday....

Sheeesh don't you keep up on the news.....

 

[Redhots]

My quote was in refrence to the part you bolded just above it.

In subsequent days, unidentified Justice and FBI officials told reporters that the e-mails provided by CREW were heavily redacted and that the group refused to provide unedited versions to the FBI.

Wasn't this the whole point of you posting the article? Blaming the leakers.

As far as what the FBI really thought of the original emails... I know i'm just sitting on an opinion right now.

Here is a link to them btw.

http://www.citizensforethics.org/filelibrary/FoleyEmailExchangeUpdated.pdf

***edited for typos***

 

[Redhots]

That's why the Democrats accusing Hastert of all this is just as it is.....Bullshit. He didn't see these Ims either until this Past Friday....

That may very well be the case. The Reynolds, Shimkus, and fromer Foley aid camps might be lying out their asses about passing the information on to Hastert a long time ago. Maybe Hasterts 2nd in commmand decided to take care of this himself. Then again Hastert could be full of shit too. Maybe they're all lying on some level about this.

There are only a handfull of people who know the truth about that and i'm not one of them, but its obvious someone here is lying.

 

[Gunny]

My quote was in refrence to the part you bolded just above it.



Wasn't this the whole point of you posting the article? Blaming the leakers.

As far as what the FBI really thought of the original emails... I know i'm just sitting on an opinion right now.

Here is a link to them btw.

http://www.citizensforethics.org/filelibrary/FoleyEmailExchangeUpdated.pdf

***edited for typos***

I guess two separate issues is more than your little mind can bear, huh?

Foley's a scumbag and good riddance. If he can be prosecuted, I'm all for that too.

Does that justify how the information was gathered? Let me see if I have this right .....

It is NOT okay to eavesdrop on phone calls originating outside the US from known or suspected terrorists. Even then, recordings of said conversations are inadmissable as evidence in a court of law.

But it IS okay for Dems to eavesdrop on Republicans, call for the dismissal of top Republicans for NOT doing it, and use evidence gained under qesutionable circumstances to indict an entire political organization. It's also okay to sit on said evidence for half a year and disclose it at a poltically opportune moment ... you know .... like you Dem-o-craps have forewarned that OBL would be produced before every election that has happened subsequent to 9/11.

Y'all are just f-ing hypocrites, period.

 

[Gunny]

That may very well be the case. The Reynolds, Shimkus, and fromer Foley aid camps might be lying out their asses about passing the information on to Hastert a long time ago. Maybe Hasterts 2nd in commmand decided to take care of this himself. Then again Hastert could be full of shit too. Maybe they're all lying on some level about this.

There are only a handfull of people who know the truth about that and i'm not one of them, but its obvious someone here is lying.

Yeah, since there're Republicans involved somebody has to be lying.

 

[jillian]

Foley should definitely be gone..

But this whole thing, the way it broke and all......Had a lot of stink on it.....

Time will tell..

Stink to the way it broke? LOL... you mean... like Lucianne Goldberg having Linda Tripp violate the trust a young woman put in her....

shocked... just shocked...

 

[Redhots]

I guess two separate issues is more than your little mind can bear, huh?

Does that justify how the information was gathered? Let me see if I have this right .....

But it IS okay for Dems to eavesdrop on Republicans, call for the dismissal of top Republicans for NOT doing it, and use evidence gained under qesutionable circumstances to indict an entire political organization. It's also okay to sit on said evidence for half a year and disclose it at a poltically opportune moment ... you know .... like you Dem-o-craps have forewarned that OBL would be produced before every election that has happened subsequent to 9/11.

Y'all are just f-ing hypocrites, period.

What planet are you from and where do you get your news?

Your whole defense here is the hieght of hypocracy btw... you can't face the fact of a GOP cover-up so you go on a wild rant. So much for taking responsiblity eh?

BTW if the Dems wanted to drop this as an election year bomb they would've waited a couple more weeks to make sure the story still had legs when people went to vote. CREW wouldn't have went to the FBI in July.

You only lose credibility by acting like this.

 

[Redhots]

Yeah, since there're Republicans involved somebody has to be lying.

Well lets see Watson.

Person A, B, & C say: We each told person D about this a many months ago.

Person D says: Nobody told me shit.

Contridicting stories would lead us to believe that somebody here is a lying scumbag.

 

[UnAmericanYOU]

BUT that dont make this any lesser of an evil

What planet are you from and where do you get your news?

Earth. FOX News, of course. Wait, Rush Limbaugh, too.

ABC News and dailykos just confuse me.

Your whole defense here is the hieght of hypocracy btw...

The height of hypocrisy? Is it okay for the NHS to wiretap a terrorist, then? Can Dennis Hastert, or should is that just okay for Republican congressional members?

Can I wiretap Dennis Hastert?

The Speaker of the House is not a baby-sitter or caretaker. Am I getting closer to the top, too?

you can't face the fact of a GOP cover-up so you go on a wild rant. So much for taking responsiblity eh?

Wild rant time, let's rumble!

THAT's the "hieght of hypocracy", going on a wild rant in order not to take responsibility?

BTW if the Dems wanted to drop this as an election year bomb they would've waited a couple more weeks to make sure the story still had legs when people went to vote.

BTW, Congress adjourned last week and won't be in session until after Election Day. BTW, it was dirty tactics meant to drag Hastert down along with any other GOP member. BTW, that would have meant calling an emergency Congressional session a couple of weeks later. BTW, that would have done maximum damage to the Republican Party. BTW, it didn't work.

CREW wouldn't have went to the FBI in July.

CREW did the just and moral thing in an inverted world, all four of them.

You only lose credibility by acting like this.

Contridicting [sic] stories would lead us to believe that somebody here is a lying scumbag BTW.

 

[Redhots]

The height of hypocrisy? Is it okay for the NHS to wiretap a terrorist, then? Can Dennis Hastert, or should is that just okay for Republican congressional members?

Where is this shit coming from btw? You aren't the only person here i've heard saying something like this.

I've never suggested anything like that and I haven't heard anyone in the media push it either.

BTW, Congress adjourned last week and won't be in session until after Election Day. BTW, it was dirty tactics meant to drag Hastert down along with any other GOP member. BTW, that would have meant calling an emergency Congressional session a couple of weeks later. BTW, that would have done maximum damage to the Republican Party.

None of that matters because even if this broke in July when the FBI was tipped off it still wouldn't be taken care of yet. The mechanics of D.C. move sloooowly. Just look how some Republicans are already putting it behind them after the inital wave of shock and disgust by telling themselves its all the Dems fault.

BTW, it didn't work.

Look at polls much?

Anyway, the sad thing is alot of people are speculating that many people are going to stay home in disgust instead of voting Republican. You can't stand voting Dem? Thats fine, go find an Independent and at least send a message. If they lose, but manage to pull more votes than the guy who ran before them it'll give the guy that runs next time something to point to when hes calling for donations and maybe, just maybe he'll win.

 

[UnAmericanYOU]

Where is this shit coming from btw? You aren't the only person here i've heard saying something like this.

I've never suggested anything like that and I haven't heard anyone in the media push it either.

You're all upset that Denny Hastert didn't wiretap his colleague for no reason at all after claiming you were admantly opposed to any electronic surveillance in principle.

Is it only okay for the legislative branch, then? What if Dick Cheney had 90k in his refridgerator? Can the executive branch use that as a bank? Speaking of which, why hasn't Jeffords resigned? Or Pelosi, she HAD to have known about it!

None of that matters because even if this broke in July when the FBI was tipped off it still wouldn't be taken care of yet. The mechanics of D.C. move sloooowly.

Actually, news AND gossip travels around Capitol Hill marginally slower than the speed of light in a vacuum. You claim the MSM and the other Democrats were ignorant, I'm saying they were complicit.

Just look how some Republicans are already putting it behind them after the inital wave of shock and disgust by telling themselves its all the Dems fault.

Foley's gone, and the Democrats finally seem to be getting it through their partisan heads that Hastert's not going down as they wish. I have heard the consistently double-standarded MSM criticize the Republicans for questioning this.

Look at polls much?

Demand until I give in? Okay, I'll go into cliche mode:

The only poll that matters is the one taken by the voters on Election Day

Happy now? These polls were made for trackin'.....

Anyway, the sad thing is alot of people are speculating that many people are going to stay home in disgust instead of voting Republican.

That's the ends, the means could backfire.

You can't stand voting Dem? Thats fine, go find an Independent and at least send a message.

Afraid the "message" will be: Impeach Bush and Cheney on groundless allegations and trigger a constitutional crisis. Scary scary.

If they lose, but manage to pull more votes than the guy who ran before them it'll give the guy that runs next time something to point to when hes calling for donations and maybe, just maybe he'll win.

Here we go again:

Negative messages only work when they are followed and preceded by positive messages.

Generally true, but money sure doesn't seem to be helping Ned Lamont, the rich kid from New Jersey. Just keep McCain and Feingold away from what they call "campaign reform", PLEASE.

 

[CockySOB]

RE: the original post

Question: was there a certifiable chain of custody for the e-mails to safe-guard their contents from the point of interception?

Question: were the e-mails encrypted and time-stamped so as to indicate with high probability that the e-mails really were from Foley?

Question: have the ISP records been accessed for the e-mail transfers to corroborate Foley's ownership?

Question: with the IM's, how has the authenticity been ascertained? Someone else already mentioned this, but it bears repeating because IM systems are notorious for their lack of appropriate tracking information.

 

[Gunny]

What planet are you from and where do you get your news?

Your whole defense here is the hieght of hypocracy btw... you can't face the fact of a GOP cover-up so you go on a wild rant. So much for taking responsiblity eh?

BTW if the Dems wanted to drop this as an election year bomb they would've waited a couple more weeks to make sure the story still had legs when people went to vote. CREW wouldn't have went to the FBI in July.

You only lose credibility by acting like this.

One can only marvel at an idiot who immediately squeals coverup the second an individual is accused of something, and THEN has the nerve to call a response to such unsupported lunacy a "rant."

I can face ANY fact you provide. So put up or shut up.

 

[Gunny]

Well lets see Watson.

Person A, B, & C say: We each told person D about this a many months ago.

Person D says: Nobody told me shit.

Contridicting stories would lead us to believe that somebody here is a lying scumbag.

Nice little theory. Too bad it isn't relevant to the events that took place surrounding this, isn't it?

Yeah, from everything I've seen, YOU are the liar.

 

[Gunny]

RE: the original post

Question: was there a certifiable chain of custody for the e-mails to safe-guard their contents from the point of interception?

Question: were the e-mails encrypted and time-stamped so as to indicate with high probability that the e-mails really were from Foley?

Question: have the ISP records been accessed for the e-mail transfers to corroborate Foley's ownership?

Question: with the IM's, how has the authenticity been ascertained? Someone else already mentioned this, but it bears repeating because IM systems are notorious for their lack of appropriate tracking information.

What the political hacks, steeped in their blind, ignorant hatred refuse to accept is that appropriate action was taken in regard to the e-mails.

Putting their little theory into practice amounts to conviction before the crime.