crime

The scope of the cover-up widens:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A Republican colleague of disgraced former Rep. Mark Foley knew of his sexually charged computer messages to teenage assistants as far back as 2000 and confronted him about them, the Washington Post reported on Monday.

A congressional page showed Arizona Republican Rep. Jim Kolbe inappropriate messages he had received from Foley six years ago, the Post reported.

The news indicates that Foley's sexually charged communications with pages were known to other lawmakers five years earlier than was previously acknowledged.

As the Washington Post reports:

The revelation pushes back by at least five years the date when a member of Congress has acknowledged learning of Foley's behavior with former pages. A timeline issued by House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) suggested that the first lawmakers to know, Rep. John M. Shimkus (R-Ill.), the chairman of the House Page Board, and Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.), became aware of "over-friendly" e-mails only last fall. It also expands the universe of players in the drama beyond members, either in leadership or on the page board.

So why did the Republicans cover for Foley for so many years? Did they think it wasn't important?

Or was protecting their image and holding on to power more important? (Duh!)

I am just totally disgusted. I never thought anyone would stoop so low -- not even those Republicans in Washington who are driving the country right into a ditch.

So much for family values. GOP leaders in Congress knew of Mark Foley's sexual cruising of minors and covered it up, all while keeping Foley in charge of the chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus.

That's right.

Republicans kept a man in his 50s, who they knew was exploiting minors online, in charge of protecting children from exploitation by adults over the Internet. Talk about the fox guarding the henhouse! (Actually, the "hens" were boys, which only adds to the hypocrisy of the homophobic GOP.)

Among the Republican explanations during the night:

_The congressional sponsor of the page, Rep. Rodney Alexander, R-La., said he was asked by the youth's parents not to pursue the matter, so he dropped it.

_Alexander said that before deciding to end his involvement, he passed on what he knew to the chairman of the House Republican campaign organization, Rep. Thomas Reynolds, R-N.Y. Reynolds' spokesman, Carl Forti, said the campaign chairman also took no action in deference to the parents' wishes.

_Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., chairman of the Page Board that oversees the congressional work-study program for high schoolers, said he did investigate but Foley falsely assured him he was only mentoring the boy. Pages are high school students who attend classes under congressional supervision and work as messengers.

_The spokesman for Speaker Dennis Hastert, Ron Bonjean, said the top House Republican had not known about the allegations. Shimkus said he learned about them in late 2005.

Late 2005??

Rep. Rodney Alexander also notified majority leader John Boehner:

Alexander said he also notified majority leader John Boehner of Ohio.

“I don’t know what action (the House leadership) took,” Alexander said.

Alexander said he believed the e-mails were inappropriate.
“It certainly wasn’t something I would say to a young man or woman,” Alexander said. “Obviously (the teenager) thought there was something wrong with it.

“I can tell you that I’d be disturbed if I was a parent or grandparent of a young person and a grown man sent him these e-mails.”

He was disturbed, but not enough to do anything about it except pass it on.

The Washington Post reports that Boehner passed it the matter on to Hastert.

Hastert has wasted no time spinning himself into the protector of children. What timing.

Meanwhile, the Republican majority leader, Representative John Boehner, R-Ohio, has blocked investigation into this matter. Instead, he's passing it on to the ethics committee.

Just a little late for that, isn't it? If Foley had not been caught, it's clear the Republicans would have done nothing.

Big hat tip to Crooks and Liars.

This just happened a couple of hours ago.

Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., resigned from Congress on Friday, effective immediately, in the wake of questions about e-mails he wrote a former male page.

"I am deeply sorry and I apologize for letting down my family and the people of Florida I have had the privilege to represent," he said in a statement issued by his office.

The two-sentence statement did not refer to the e-mails and gave no reason for Foley's decision to abruptly abandon a flourishing career in Congress.

This comes on the heels of his staffers' efforts to blame Democrats for the story getting out, which doesn't really make Foley look that good, either.

Foley's aides initially blamed Democratic rival Tim Mahoney and Democrats with attempting to smear the congressman before the election....

..."They've been shopping this around to reporters for weeks now. They want a headline and that's it. It's a political smear campaign of the worst kind," Kello said.

Is the scandal about how the story got out, or what the story is?

For the record, Democrat Tim Mahoney's campaign says that Foley should be considered innocent until proven guilty.

The campaign for Mahoney, who trails Foley in the polls, said it didn't release the e-mails and wouldn't make them part of the campaign. In a statement released by Mahoney spokesman Jessica Santillo, the campaign referred to the boy as an "alleged victim."

"The seriousness of these allegations goes far beyond the tit for tat of a political campaign," Santillo said. "This is a matter for the appropriate authorities to investigate. I believe Mr. Foley deserves the benefit of the doubt until these allegations are proven true or false."

The sudden resignation surprised me, and it seems to indicate that maybe there's something to those allegations. The emails themselves do seem to be pretty creepy, and I can't say I'd want my son receiving such attention from any middle-aged man, let alone a powerful Republican politician in Washington.

The real news is that Republican endorsement of torture is now official. But despite events of global import, Republicans still love a sex scandal. Maybe here's one of their own:

"Sick sick sick sick sick":

A 16-year-old male former congressional page concerned about the appropriateness of an e-mail exchange with a congressman alerted Capitol Hill staffers to the communication.

Congressman Mark Foley's office says the e-mails were entirely appropriate and that their release is part of a smear campaign by his opponent.

In the series of e-mails, obtained by ABC News, from Rep. Foley (R-FL) to the former page, Foley asks the young man how old he is, what he wants for his birthday and requests a photo of him.

John at Americablog notes that Foley's home page is all about protecting children from predators.

Up for even more creepy? Foley's congressional home page is all about child sex offenders. Why, because Foley is the Co-chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children Caucus. Yes, this is the guy the Republicans put in charge of taking care of child sex offenders. Seriously, this is sick.

John has some scans of the emails themselves.

Meanwhile, Foley's office is playing "blame the victim":

Elizabeth Nicolson, Foley's Chief of Staff, said they believe the e-mail exchange began when the page asked Foley for a recommendation and that the subsequent exchange was totally innocent. She said Foley's office believes the e-mails were released by the opposition as part of an "ugly smear campaign."

Before you get too dizzy from your spin job, Elizabeth Nicolson, let's remember that it's the page himself who's creeped out. Is this all his fault? Is that the policy advocated in all these child protection policies Mark Foley advocates? Blame the victim?

Now, this is about when the right-wing sycophants will attack the page for wearing a sweater, right? Oh wait, the page is a guy. That won't work. Well, they'll figure an angle to blame Bill Clinton, just you wait and see.

(If this were a Democratic congressman, imagine the howls you'd be hearing from the entire wingnut dittosphere.)

TBogg notes:

And it's a shame because, despite Foley's role helping George Bush steal the Florida election, he's fairly moderate as far as Republicans go. And it's not like he hasn't been under the sexuality microscope before. If this blows up...and it probably will (Republicans will run away from him like he's a Army recruiter), his replacement will likely be another Republican loon of the type we have come to expect from Florida.

I cannot believe we're even talking about this.

On the key issue of detainee treatment that had caused the impasse between the White House and the dissident Republicans, the two sides agreed on a list of specified crimes that could provoke prosecution of CIA interrogators and others. They also agreed that past violations of the Geneva Conventions, an international treaty barring degrading and humiliating treatment of detainees, would not result in criminal or civil legal action.

The White House, for its part, yielded in its demand to adopt, with congressional approval, a restricted definition of its obligations under Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions. That article requires humane treatment of detainees and bars "violence to life and person," such as death and mutilation, as well as cruel treatment and "outrages upon personal dignity."

The compromise language gives the president a dominant -- but not exclusive -- role in deciding which interrogation methods are permitted by that provision of the treaty. It also prohibits detainees from using the Geneva Conventions to challenge their imprisonment or seek civil damages for mistreatment, as the administration sought.

The torture provisions, which are staunchly defended by hawks who, for the most part, have not served in the military, are still a mystery.

What methods of torture were being employed by the CIA on terr’r suspects? 495 of the 535 members of Congress, including the Senate can’t tell you. With the recent redefinition of the Geneva Conventions between the President and those "maverick" politicking, stumping, fooling Republican Senators McCain and Frist, which methods were kept, and which ones were dumped? Again, only 40 of our 535 most important national leaders can answer that question. It’s “secret”, as are so many other actions this President and his Administration take behind closed doors.

What is even more disturbing about this whole thing is the fact that in just a couple of days, 495 of our members of the Halls of Congress will be asked to, and most likely will be participating in the vote to finalize this so-called “anti-torture” legislation; the brainchild of President Bush. And they don’t even know what they’re voting for or against, only that the President wants it quite badly; some on the left going as far as to speculate for the self-serving purpose of staying out of prison for war crimes.

The temptation to cave into fear and descend to the level of the terror criminals out there seems to be irresistible to these conservatives.

We fought the Nazis and did not descend to their level. What enemy we have faced since has been more horrible in goals and tactics? The instances of our past, where Americans let fear short-cut American values -- such as the Japanese internment camps and the witch-hunt against American citizens under McCarthy -- have been shameful episodes. Have we learned nothing as a nation?

And yet these Republicans, in their bed-wetting fear, insist on twisting and distorting American values, working contrary to their oaths of office in errant and unconstitutional means to gain intelligence, even though torture does not work.

America is at a crossroads here. George W. Bush took our mandate -- which was largely the world's mandate -- to deal with the Taliban and al-Qaeda, and twisted it into a horrific war of choice in Iraq. That's bad enough. We're in a fucking mess there.

But he's not only taking us into imperialist adventurism, but also into the darker depths of base and inhumane behavior. Torture? Do we really need to shred our Constitution in order to be safe, as the Republicans claim?

If they cannot perform their jobs within the framework of the law and the U.S. Constitution, then they should have a chance to resign, then be impeached if they don’t. A lack of creative ideas and the ability to perform critical thinking does not give anybody the right to hover above the law. And that is exactly what these people are trying to do.

It's time America responded with integrity and intelligence, and not easily-goaded rage and stupidity.

It's time, before it's too late.