| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
EFLtrainer

Joined: 04 May 2005
|
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 11:48 am Post subject: Foley, Rove and the Mid-term Elections |
|
|
Or: How the White House Encourages Pedophilia
http://www.tnr.com/blog/theplank?pid=47854
| Quote: |
HOW ROVE TWISTED FOLEY'S ARM:
"...He said, 'The White House made it very clear I have to run,'" explains Foley's friend, adding that Foley told him that the White House promised that if Foley served for two more years it would "enhance his success" as a lobbyist. "I said, 'I thought you wanted out of this?' And he said, 'I do, but they're scared of losing the House and the thought of two years of Congressional hearings, so I have two more years of duty.'"... |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 2:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I haven't followed the Foley scandal in detail. Is Rove one of the party leaders who knew about Foley? If not, then this isn't important. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
EFLtrainer

Joined: 04 May 2005
|
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 3:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There are a couple points here: 1. We don't know who knew what when with any certainty, but any skeletons that were known were certainly discussed in party strategy. People get paid to consider all the options and know where trouble might lie. 2. Given #1, it seems likely people involved in strategizing, and Hastert certainly would heve been one, made a choice to keep him on despite his predelictions.
However, an equally telling remark is this: I do, but they're scared of losing the House and the thought of two years of Congressional hearings."
If you've nothing to hide, you don't worry about congressional hearings, do you? And, you don't make laws that retroactively protect you from existing laws, do you? (Which I believe to be unconstitutional...) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
(Which I believe to be unconstitutional...)
|
So is declaring someone guilty when you admit that:
| Quote: |
| We don't know who knew what when with any certainty |
I'm as disturbed by abuse of authority and sexual predators as anyone. I dislike Rove and Company and am hoping they go down in defeat next month. But I don't like witch hunts and tossing accusations around without proof. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
EFLtrainer

Joined: 04 May 2005
|
Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2006 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
(Which I believe to be unconstitutional...)
|
So is declaring someone guilty when you admit that:
| Quote: |
| We don't know who knew what when with any certainty |
I'm as disturbed by abuse of authority and sexual predators as anyone. I dislike Rove and Company and am hoping they go down in defeat next month. But I don't like witch hunts and tossing accusations around without proof. |
Suppositions and theories always begin without the proof. You seem to be confused about procedure. There is no flaw in my logic. Whether the WH actually knew of Foley's antics or not will be known eventually. But, again, given Hastert knew and would have been involved in any strategizing about elections, it's a very small step to the WH, et. al., knowing. In fact, if the RNC and the White House, I take someone's head for not catching this and/or not doing a better job of keeping it quiet at such a critical time for the party.
We shall see. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|