Foley's IMs Uncensored- Content Warning

What if the person on the other end was 18 years of age?
Would you feel any different?

Sick sick sick... I'm so glad that perv is out. He got pwned big time too with those IMS out there for everyone to read. Honestly I didn't get past page3 or so... it was starting to get really grossed out. I mean, that generates a picture in my mind that I don't want to see ever again!

Originally posted by spacedoubt
What if the person on the other end was 18 years of age?
Would you feel any different?

This isn't a gay debate, but since it's pertinent to this topic, yes I would feel extremely differently. I have nothing against homosexuals, one of my truest friends is gay and is honorably serving his country right now.

The issue is a congressman who has worked with many laws relating to child predators has been caught preying on children. At least one other page has come forward to reveal this. Further, Hastert (oversight, Foley's boss) knew of this, did nothing, and later received a fairly big campaign contribution from Foley. And again, others in the White House knew since before 2005.

Ignorance, cover-up, payoff, and child predation. All of these suck, but the last is what's worse. I know what Foley said isn't hard core in itself, but it has a different meaning when it's from a congressman to an underage teen.

Originally posted by RetinoidReceptor
The IM really isn't that bad. It is inappropriate, but not so horrible.

Inappropriate..........

Does "Contributing to the delenquency of a minor" ring a bell.

















[edit on 4-10-2006 by whaaa]

Originally posted by spacedoubt
What if the person on the other end was 18 years of age?
Would you feel any different?

If they were of adult age but still that young there would, in my opinion, be moral aspects to him talking with young, impresionable adults of his staff. The fact is they weren't 18, the child was 16, how long was this going on before he was found out?

This has nothing to do with the comments being directed towards a male. If his comments were as descriptive towards a 16 year old girl sitting at home ... asking her what she was wearing/how she masturbated/etc ... he would be in just as much trouble. There is no excuse for his behavior ... it was way past any reasonable conversation one would expect an adult to have with their child.

What I find even more disgusting then this Foley guy was how Fox News kept trying to claim he was a Democrat, I saw it my self, and it appeared multiple times(in the caption section), without a retraction or apology. Roves handiwork? Smells very Swift-boat-ish.

Also, why do politicians and celebrities get off after going to Rehab? Kate Moss, Kennedy(DUI) and now this jerk. It's like they(and their "Fans") believe they are above the law or something...

[edit on 4-10-2006 by sardion2000]

Also, why do politicians and celebrities get off after going to Rehab? Kate Moss, Kennedy(DUI) and now this jerk. It's like they believe they are above the law or something...

Because ppl like them,and they have money. They also know how to pay the right people the right amount of money in order to get off. Money and power in this country means near invincibility.

Sardion makes a good point. If I were busted doing this, I would be a pedophile and prosecuted as such. But when important people do such things, it's a tragic "disease" and we "all pray for their recovery".

I hope no one thought my comment was a dig on homosexuals.

What I was getting at is a developing story on Drudge regarding the true age of the
young person on the other end.
There is a thread over here
politics.abovetopsecret.com...

This 16 year old, may in fact, have been an 18 year old.


The person may have been correctly ID'd

Originally posted by spacedoubt
What if the person on the other end was 18 years of age?
Would you feel any different?

Not really, no. That kid STILL had terrible spelling.

And for all his self-righteous hat, Foley apparently had no moral cattle. If it turns out the kid was 18, Foley's already self-incriminated himself under the impression he was busted for soliciting a 16 year old for sex. Which means, IMO, just because this one kid might turn out to be 18, Foly has certainly knowingly solicited other minors.

Now, if the first words out of Foley's lips had been "No! He was 18! I swear I thought he was 18," then I could have found a little bit of forgiveness, but not much. It would imply that he was under a mistaken impression that stupid people sometimes fail to double-check. I know such an excuse doesn't hold up in court but it is a damn sight better than a response of "Oh, crap, I uhhh... have this problem, see?"

However, even aside from age, gender, and context, Foley is sexually harassing an employee, on my tax dollar's time, and that is wrong whether you're straight, gay, bi, or whatever.

it seems there is an investigation into Foley's drunken encounter in the dorms as well. Apparently he stumbled into the dorms at some point, drunk as hell.

Originally posted by thelibra

Originally posted by spacedoubt
What if the person on the other end was 18 years of age?
Would you feel any different?

Not really, no. That kid STILL had terrible spelling.



Now, if the first words out of Foley's lips had been "No! He was 18! I swear I thought he was 18," then I could have found a little bit of forgiveness, but not much. It would imply that he was under a mistaken impression that stupid people sometimes fail to double-check. I know such an excuse doesn't hold up in court but it is a damn sight better than a response of "Oh, crap, I uhhh... have this problem, see?"

However, even aside from age, gender, and context, Foley is sexually harassing an employee, on my tax dollar's time, and that is wrong whether you're straight, gay, bi, or whatever.

I certainly agree there.
Get caught stealing a dollar, but confess to the 10,000 bucks you stole last month.

MY point here was to say that this LURID exchange may have taken place with a person who was over age. But was presented by ABC as a conversation with a minor.

There may have been others that were under age at the time.
I saw an interview with 2 former pages, claiming some improprieties, claiming that beer was offered..Actually one siaf there WAS beer, the other said there was NO beer.

I'm just saying to be alert for Timeframes within this story.

Things like "sexually suggestive IM's exchanged with page who was 16 years old when they met".
Even though the IM may have been exchanged 2 years after they met.

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Foley has admitted that he is homosexual but not a pedophile. Either way, his career as a Republican is over with.

Yep. He'll fit right in as a Democrat though!!

We have a similar discussion going on here.

Foley Page Possibly Identified

Originally posted by spacedoubt
MY point here was to say that this LURID exchange may have taken place with a person who was over age. But was presented by ABC as a conversation with a minor.

Yeah, that doesn't really change my stance. Sexual harassment is wrong, and I don't cotton to it.

Now, before I get replies of "sometimes it's not as simple--" let me just say, yeah, I know. I'm not talking about something like an appreciative whistle, or calling someone cute, ugly, or asking someone on a date. There's varying degrees of all those things and some can be inappropriate and offensive, and I've got a lot of forgiveness as far as normal human worker interaction is concerned, so please don't think I'm on a holy quest against office sexuality. I just want to make that clear.

But what Foley is doing in those IM's, is out and out badgering an employee, over and over, about sex, his attraction to the employee, and steering the conversation constantly back towards sex. It is bluntly obvious that the employee is uncomfortable with the conversation and trying to change the subject. Granted, I only read to page 3, but by the time he began getting graphic, the charge was obvious.

Any manager, in any company would lose his job with such proof, no matter if he was even the CEO, such behavior is just flat-out unacceptable in the business world. I would, to be honest, fully recommend to anyone in such a situation to file suit to ensure that such a thing not happen again.

Now, add to that the creepy eww factor of the fact that, whether or not the kid was 18, he was still a dirty hypocritical old man trying to pick up a school kid and what you have here is a person I have zero sympathy for.

Now, note how everything I specifically pointed out is independant of sexual preference, or alcoholism. Two issues of which Foley is attempting to make the center of media focus instead of what the true offense is: agressive sexual harassment against a school-aged employee.

Huh, before yall get to far down the road here...ya might wanna read this:

SEX CHAT WAS WITH 18 YEAR OLD

On Tuesday ABC news released a high-impact instant message exchange between Foley and, as ABC explained, a young man "under the age of 18."

ABC headlined the story: "New Foley Instant Messages; Had Internet Sex While Awaiting House Vote"

But upon reviewing the records, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned, the young man was in fact over the age of 18 at the time of the exchange.

A network source explains, messages with the young man and disgraced former Congressman Foley took place before and after the 18th birthday.

Source: www.drudgereport.com...