Gingrich says Hastert shouldn't resign over handling of page scandal

Team Infidel

Forum Spin Doctor
http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/state/15670684.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp
JEFFREY McMURRAY
Associated Press
LEXINGTON, Ky. - Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Tuesday that his successor, Dennis Hastert, appropriately handled the aftermath of a scandal involving a Florida congressman and salacious, explicit instant messages to underage male pages.
Gingrich on Tuesday dismissed a call for Hastert's resignation by The Washington Times, a conservative newspaper whose editorial page editor is Gingrich's former press secretary, Tony Blankley.
"I do not agree with that, and I think it's very premature and very inappropriate," said Gingrich, who was in Lexington to give a speech to the University of Kentucky's Sanders-Brown Center on Aging Foundation.
Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., abruptly resigned Friday after news reports surfaced that he sent inappropriate instant messages to teenage boys who once worked as House pages.
On Tuesday, House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Hastert told him last spring that a Louisiana page's complaint about Foley had "been taken care of."
Gingrich, a Republican who represented a district in Georgia, said it appeared Hastert did all he could by sending another congressman to confront Foley about the charges. Beyond that, Gingrich said, the information he had at the time wasn't "actionable."
"You look him in the eye," Gingrich said. "You say, 'This is dangerous. It's inappropriate. You can't do it.' And, in this case, we now know that U.S. Rep. Foley lied. Now, when you catch him in the lie, you then take stronger action. But until you catch him, you can't presumptively do that."
Gingrich suggested there is a double standard that Republican scandals reflect badly on all Republicans while Democratic scandals, such as Bill Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky, don't affect other Democrats. He also questioned the timing of the release of the information, just a few weeks before the midterm elections.
Even if there was suspicion about Foley, Gingrich said, there is little that could have been done legally.
"You just had the Democrats vote against wiretapping for the purpose of getting terrorists, but it's OK to wiretap for the purpose of getting Republicans?" he said. "I don't understand the double standard."
As a freshman member of Congress in 1983, Gingrich took a hard line approach against two congressmen who were accused of having sexual relationships with congressional pages. Gingrich tried to get the congressmen forced out of office, but the House voted to censure them instead.
He said treatment of the Foley situation is a testament to how far the country has come in child protection cases.
"The mood was that it was almost a joke," Gingrich said. "I'm glad the House, in fact, is taking this much more seriously. I think it's a healthy sign for the country that we realize that these kinds of behaviors are dangerous and that we are prepared to protect young people."
 
I think it's a healthy sign for the country that we realize that these kinds of behaviors are dangerous and that we are prepared to protect young people.

What a crock of s***. They knew about this incident since late last year, and they tried to cover it up. On top of it the were rumors going about this guy since 1996. This didnt come out of the blue despite what Mr Hastert might say, even the Washington Times recognizes this.

So please spare us the BS about how prepared you are to protect young people. You had your chance Mr Speaker, and you chose to protect a pedophile in order to cover your political buttocks. Where's your moral outrage now? The Boston Archdioese got in hot water for protecting pedophile priests, this is no different.

You need to resign Mr Speaker. Resign, or be thrown out, either at the elections or by your own party. Nobody in America wants a protector of pedophiles as Speaker of the House, Your're done.
 
"You just had the Democrats vote against wiretapping for the purpose of getting terrorists, but it's OK to wiretap for the purpose of getting Republicans?" he said. "I don't understand the double standard."
He tries to put this nicely, doesn't he? Maybe he should be more precise and say the random wire tapping based on hunches was declined. But any tap on someone, that went through proper procedures are probably okay by the Democrats.... Why can't he be straight about it (nice pun with regards to the preferences of Foley)? Why does he try to spin away from the issue and start slandering the Democrats again with something so far from the issue? Aren't there any real men (...and again;)) left in the Republican camp who say: he did it and now he has to pay the price!
 
Yeah and Democrats are real angels....

What Foley did was wrong, granted there was no physical contact and the boy was 16 but none the less what he did was wrong...However whether it is illegal is questionable, immoral yes...

Then again the Kennedy family isn't guilty of any immoral actions, or are they???? Some can even argue guilt of illegal actions...In other words if you want to sling poop their is plenty to go around some may even say more so on one side then the other...

If you don't get what I am talking about with the legality

One federal law enforcement official said the FBI reviewed some Foley-related e-mail in July but concluded that no federal law had been violated.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15126151/

So let's keep the facts straight he is NOT a pedophile, as of yet anyways...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The boy was 15 when it happened and there is now a record of Foley having phone-sex with another teen, thats what the law calls "a lewd act with a minor" and it is illegal. Remember its several kids that are involved not just one. The youngest was 12.

BTW, I don't buy the no physical contact arguement just because Foley Lawyer said so. Thats what defense lawyers are suppose to say, Did you really expect him to admit he's a child molester on national TV? We shall see if thats true or not.

Attempting to lump Kennedy (or Clinton, because I just know someone is bound to mention him) doesn't compare at all. Clinton and the Kennedys liasons were immoral, but not illegal. Lets not try and compare a harmless affair amongst consentual adults, with pedophilia.

You miss the point entirely. Its not that Foley's Pedophila thats the main problem. Honestly, that could have happened to anybody, I dont blame the GOP for that. Its the fact the GOP leadership thought losing a house seat was worse than exposing a pedophile in their midst and allowed it to continue, while at the same time denouncing the immorality of everybody else (Like Kennedy and Clinton). Its so hypocritical, its laughable.

It will have an impact on the elections. Republicans are elected because there are some people that are dumb enough to believe that the GOP are more moral then Democrats. So how does being a pedophile who likes little boys going to look in the deep south? I rest my case.
 
Where are the sources for your information because I have not heard those accusations....

No formal charges have been brought against Foley as of yet and this is because the boy in question was 16....

However depending on the state age of consent can be as low as 14 (which I find very disturbing)...

It is not a matter of me supporting the man it is a matter of speaking the facts and the facts only...It is a matter of our whole system and how it works, how one is innocent until proven guilty...

Foley has even held onto all IM and e-mail records to turn over to authorities even though he has not been asked for them...While one can argue this is a sign of a man with nothing more to hide other then some serious sick thoughts (again debatable by some), one can also argue that is a sign of a cover up....

It really isn’t a cover up if as they stated investigated back in July and found nothing illegal how can you cover up a crime that did not exist? However you can certainly cover up behavior unbecoming of a congressman. Clinton and the Kennedy’s are different they committed crimes.
 
Last edited:
Ok first of all small point he was 16, my mistake.

I think its best you watch the video it answers your questions

http://americablog.blogspot.com/2006/10/gop-staff-warned-pages-about-foley-in.html

Again we must not be confusing morals and legalities...

As of yet he has done nothing illegal so their really wasnt anything to cover up, he was investigated all along. I am not saying what he did is within what I think is morally right but he did not do anything illegal. Which is in contrast to the Democrats people are comparing.

By the law he has done nothing wrong, so far.
 
Did you watch the video?

It stated that Denny Hastert had sent a letter to the DA asking that a criminal investigation be opened concerning that fact that a coverup might have taken place.

The FBI is investigating right now.

If the speaker of the House is requesting an investigation of his own party, thats not a good sign.
 
This isnt the first investigation and perhaps it isnt a bad sign but more a sign of trying to clear any assumptions. Because that is all that is going on right now, assumptions.

The facts as of now, was that no crime occured and therefore no cover up could have occured.

However I feel a moral crime has occured but that is not my place to say. Nore would it be anyone elses place, unless you want to go against what the Democrats have been voicing for years.
 
http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/state/15670684.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp
JEFFREY McMURRAY
Associated Press
LEXINGTON, Ky. - Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Tuesday that his successor, Dennis Hastert, appropriately handled the aftermath of a scandal involving a Florida congressman and salacious, explicit instant messages to underage male pages.
Gingrich on Tuesday dismissed a call for Hastert's resignation by The Washington Times, a conservative newspaper whose editorial page editor is Gingrich's former press secretary, Tony Blankley.
"I do not agree with that, and I think it's very premature and very inappropriate," said Gingrich, who was in Lexington to give a speech to the University of Kentucky's Sanders-Brown Center on Aging Foundation.
Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., abruptly resigned Friday after news reports surfaced that he sent inappropriate instant messages to teenage boys who once worked as House pages.
On Tuesday, House Majority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said Hastert told him last spring that a Louisiana page's complaint about Foley had "been taken care of."
Gingrich, a Republican who represented a district in Georgia, said it appeared Hastert did all he could by sending another congressman to confront Foley about the charges. Beyond that, Gingrich said, the information he had at the time wasn't "actionable."
"You look him in the eye," Gingrich said. "You say, 'This is dangerous. It's inappropriate. You can't do it.' And, in this case, we now know that U.S. Rep. Foley lied. Now, when you catch him in the lie, you then take stronger action. But until you catch him, you can't presumptively do that."
Gingrich suggested there is a double standard that Republican scandals reflect badly on all Republicans while Democratic scandals, such as Bill Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky, don't affect other Democrats. He also questioned the timing of the release of the information, just a few weeks before the midterm elections.
Even if there was suspicion about Foley, Gingrich said, there is little that could have been done legally.
"You just had the Democrats vote against wiretapping for the purpose of getting terrorists, but it's OK to wiretap for the purpose of getting Republicans?" he said. "I don't understand the double standard."
As a freshman member of Congress in 1983, Gingrich took a hard line approach against two congressmen who were accused of having sexual relationships with congressional pages. Gingrich tried to get the congressmen forced out of office, but the House voted to censure them instead.
He said treatment of the Foley situation is a testament to how far the country has come in child protection cases.
"The mood was that it was almost a joke," Gingrich said. "I'm glad the House, in fact, is taking this much more seriously. I think it's a healthy sign for the country that we realize that these kinds of behaviors are dangerous and that we are prepared to protect young people."


Those stinking republicans. They sure are starting to rot!
 
Hurricane in the House of Representatives ...

Donkey
What is it about 'anyone' believing that there is MORE to this cover-up story than Hastert and other Republicans want to admit, that ABSOLUTELY trips your 'there are no charges' attempt to change the discussion of whether there was a cover-up to whether there are any criminal charge that Foley may (or) may not be guilty of?

When Hastert's former aide says that information was given to Hastert at least three years ago and there is corroborating statements from 'other' Republicans that it is so, the red flag (Maggie's Drawers), are doing more than just waving in a slight breeze ... the flag is flying in a veritable wind storm of Herculean proportions ... there is a hurricane in the House of Representatives because of allegations of a cover-up, whether you personally like it or not.

One of the side effects of this storm, is that a lot more Congressman MAY end up losing their seats in the upcoming election than would have been lost if Hastert and other leading House Republican, had come clean when 'Foley's Follies' was FIRST disclosed to Hastert and other House Republicans.
 
Back
Top