Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Foley report: Republicans negligent in protecting pages (but broke no rules)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
seafan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-08-06 03:49 PM
Original message
Foley report: Republicans negligent in protecting pages (but broke no rules)
Foley report: Republicans negligent in protecting pages

AP
Fri, Dec. 08, 2006


WASHINGTON - (AP) -- The House ethics committee has concluded that Republican leaders were negligent in protecting male pages from ex-Rep. Mark Foley's improper advances, but they did not break any rules in handling the Foley case.

The committee was releasing its findings today.

The aide, who was not authorized to be quoted by name, was made aware of the committee's findings.

''The Republicans did not break rules but were negligent in protecting the pages,'' the aide said.

A four-member investigative subcommittee interviewed dozens of witnesses, including Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., to determine whether majority Republicans took strong enough action against Foley when they learned of his questionable e-mails and other computer messages.

snip

Hastert's aides could have learned of Foley's inappropriate e-mails as early as 2002 and as late as 2005, depending on who is recounting the events.
The speaker said his aides first learned in the fall of 2005 about questionable e-mails between Foley and a former page from Louisiana. Foley's former top aide said he told Hastert's chief of staff about the Florida lawmaker in 2002 or 2003.

Also, Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, and House Republican campaign chief Tom Reynolds, R-N.Y., said they told Hastert about Foley's inappropriate behavior last spring. Hastert said he could not recall those conversations, and did not learn of Foley's conduct until late September when the matter became public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Not Me Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-08-06 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
1. And, no disciplinary actions to be taken.
Why does this not surprise me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Botany Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-08-06 03:59 PM
Response to Original message
2. Friday afternoon last day of the session
..... "Let us sneak this screaming turd by the American people."



Time for some old school justice ..... this stinks!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynneSin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-08-06 04:00 PM
Response to Original message
3. I say this case is re-opened AFTER the first of the year
Clearly with the republicans in control for their last few days they want to get this matter swept under the rug as soon as possible
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stopbush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-08-06 04:07 PM
Response to Original message
4. Time to change the rules.
One can only imagine how the House rules read right now. Maybe sexual abuse of children is permissible if a lubricant is used. Maybe
sexual harrassment in the workplace is OK - if you work in the House where little or no work is done.

The true elites in our country are these bozos. Disgusting.

Let's hope the Ds do a better job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rocktivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-08-06 04:08 PM
Response to Original message
5. If they didn't inform the Dems (or the Dem-sponsored pages), they broke a rule
Edited on Fri Dec-08-06 04:09 PM by rocknation
And if they left Foley in charge of the anti-child pornography committee and allowed him to run for office again after finding out the truth, they were MORE then negligent!

:mad:
rocknation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sinkingfeeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-08-06 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
6. I just finished reading the whole report. Looks like Hastert and Scot Palmer were the only
Edited on Fri Dec-08-06 04:54 PM by sinkingfeeling
two to use the 'I don't recall' those calls, meetings, or conversations. They're the two I would suspect of a cover-up.

Edit: corrected by their
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-09-06 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #6
17. They really need to hammer the citizens in Hastert's district
about how he loves little boys. That he did everything to protect the male pages in Congress. Billboards with Hastert and a boy page and Foley.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-09-06 04:06 AM
Response to Original message
7. House panel: GOP leaders negligent in protecting teen pages.
House panel: GOP leaders negligent in protecting teen pages.

Breaking on http://www.msnbc.msn.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brooklynite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-09-06 04:06 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Details...
Edited on Fri Dec-08-06 02:18 PM by brooklynite
House Ethics finds GOP leaders negligent

WASHINGTON - The House ethics committee has concluded that Republican leaders did not break any rules in handling ex-Rep. Mark Foley's improper advances to former male pages but were negligent in protecting the teenagers, a congressional aide said Friday.

The committee released its findings Friday.

The aide, who was not authorized to be quoted by name, was made aware of the committee's findings.

"The Republicans did not break rules but were negligent in protecting the pages," the aide said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16107115/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-09-06 04:06 AM
Response to Reply #8
13. I guess that also means that they were negligent in making the rules too!
Since the rules allowed this behavior and they concluded that the behavior was negligent, then those constructing the rules for oversight of this are ALSO negligent in my book!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deminks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-09-06 04:06 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Foley panel: GOP didn't protect pages
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061208/ap_on_go_co/congress_ethics

WASHINGTON - The House ethics committee reported Friday that Republican lawmakers and aides failed to protect young male pages from former Rep. Mark Foley (news, bio, voting record)'s improper advances, concluding an investigation into a scandal that convulsed Congress and contributed to the GOP defeat in last month's elections.

The panel said it found no evidence that any current lawmakers or aides violated any rules. But it said it discovered a pattern of conduct among many "to remain willfully ignorant of the potential consequences" of Foley's conduct.

The report found that Hastert was likely told about Foley's e-mails by two Republican leaders last spring.

Hastert has said he doesn't recall the conversations. But both Majority Leader John Boehner of Ohio and Rep. Tom Reynolds of New York, have said they informed the speaker last spring.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lpbk2713 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-09-06 04:06 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. Rethugs like Foley probably considered the pages a 'perc'.



... one of the fringe benefits of being a member of the party that was in power for six years. Which actually explains why they are no longer in power.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eugene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-09-06 04:06 AM
Response to Reply #7
10. Willful Ignorance But No Rules Broken - ABC Blotter
Willful Ignorance But No Rules Broken

December 08, 2006 3:09 PM

Jake Tapper Reports:

The House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct released its report investigating
the scandal surrounding the inappropriate contact former Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) had
with congressional pages, finding that "a pattern of conduct was exhibited among many
individuals to remain willfully ignorant" of Foley's behavior though no "current House
Members or employees violated the House Code of Official Conduct."

-snip-

Calling the report a "whitewash," Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for
Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said that the "House Ethics Committee has
proven itself yet again to be entirely incapable of investigating wrongdoing by members
of Congress."

-snip-

Full article: http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/congressman_foley_internet_scandal/index.html

Since when is willful ingorance not considered acceptance or complicity?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AIJ Alom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-09-06 04:06 AM
Response to Reply #7
12. OOO Wow. That's only what people here on DU said a couple
of months ago !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-09-06 04:22 AM
Response to Original message
14. Looks like their next move should be to hire a Sexual Harassment expert from any good Personnel Dept
May I suggest the former Affirmative Action Officer of my own county government? Or someone from the Human Resources Dept of my local university?

Good gods, any such person worth their salt could write up a solid policy manual in their sleep. Then the following week distribute a copy to every employee and congresscritter. Then the week after that start holding small-group training sessions. Then when that's done hold follow-up sessions to make sure everyone understands the program. And immediately start following up on complaints, because one of the first things that happens when you start having training sessions is that people who didn't know they had a right to complain decide to.

The only flaw in that plan is that it absolutely requires commitment at the top, and clearly that is what is lacking in the hallowed halls of Congress.

I am disgusted.

Certainly one order of business in January 2007 is to convene an Ethics Committee worth the name. One with teeth.

Hekate

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthisfreedom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-09-06 05:55 AM
Response to Original message
15. "Hastert said he could not recall those conversations" = "I did not have sex with that woman"
which is why you will no longer have a leadership position, denny.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreeStateDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-09-06 06:49 AM
Response to Original message
16. Brian Williams on NBC news called it a bi-partisan committee inferring Dems agreed to no penalties
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-09-06 12:26 PM
Response to Original message
18. The AbuPage report is a whitewash. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 03rd 2021, 11:16 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC