Of Interest To Whom?

The latest Times coverage by Carl Hulse and Jeff Zeleny of the Foley Follies includes this odd clue:

One person emerging as a subject of interest is Christy Surprenant, the former director of administration in the speaker’s office, who was Mr. Palmer’s assistant. Ms. Surprenant, who later worked for President Bush’s campaign in her native Minnesota, could not be reached for comment on Saturday.

Ms. Surprenant has been emerging quietly - this is the first mention I have seen of her in the news.

The background is this:

A former senior aide to Mark Foley expects to go before the House ethics committee next week and testify under oath that he alerted the speaker’s office as early as 2003 to inappropriate contact with teenage pages by Mr. Foley, his lawyer said Saturday.

The former aide, Kirk Fordham, will also tell the panel that Scott Palmer, the longtime chief of staff to Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, later met with Mr. Foley to talk about his troubling interest in pages, though Mr. Fordham did not attend that meeting, said Timothy J. Heaphy, Mr. Fordham’s lawyer.

“He continues to stand by his claim that he alerted Scott Palmer to this incident with Foley, and he knows there was a subsequent meeting with Foley and Palmer,” said Mr. Heaphy, who contacted the ethics committee on Friday to offer Mr. Fordham as a witness. “Kirk is confident and ready to go under oath.”

Mr. Palmer has denied having such a discussion with Mr. Fordham, who was a top aide to Mr. Foley, a Florida Republican, until January 2004. The speaker’s office has said it had no inkling of Mr. Foley’s contact with pages until the family of a former page in Louisiana complained about a communication to their son from Mr. Foley in the fall of 2005.

A chronology assembled by the speaker’s office said that neither Mr. Hastert nor Mr. Palmer were ever made aware of that e-mail message, which led to a warning to Mr. Foley to cease communication with the youth but no other action. Mr. Hastert said he had no knowledge of Mr. Foley’s activities until just before the lawmaker resigned on Sept. 29 after the disclosure of other, sexually explicit electronic messages to former pages. The resulting political and legal uproar is overshadowing the final weeks of campaigning for the midterm elections.

Comments

[jerry]

Novak has a very interesting article today saying that Reynolds pushed Foley to run again, Foley had some other jobs lined up, despite knowledge of his behavior.

[Terrye]

Can Fordham back this up with anything? Palmer can not prove a negative, but it seems to me that if Fordham is telling the truth [this time] he might have some evidence of it, of course he also on record saying he had no idea that Foley was doing anything unseemly. I saw on the Fox web site that there is some former page coming forward and saying he had sex with Foley. I did not read it, I am just not up to that this early in the am.

How can anyone prove or disprove any of this? Where were all these people years ago?

[Florence Schmieg]

On Fox they said that this sexual act if it happened would be with an ex-page when he was 21.

[Seven Star Hand (LW Page)]

Hello Tom and all,

Want to better understand some of the desperation among top Christian politicos? Want to know what else they are pretending not to know about? Follow the links and read about who I am and what I have to say. Notice that my last name is Page? Think this "page" scandal is a mere coincidence? The timing and ramifications are much worse than most realize yet.

If Christian political leaders are going to go around attacking others for not living up to their professed values, it's a damn good idea to be truthful and actually walk the walk. Logs and motes in the eye, camels through the eye of a needle, glass houses, kettles and pots, and what goes around comes around, et al. Karma's a bitch when She finally decides enough is enough! This wouldn't have been so bad on Republicans if they hadn't been such arrogant hypocrites in order to corner the so-called values voters! Now the "Two Candlesticks" and "Two Witnesses" (Truth and Justice) are "breathing fire" and "raining hailstones!"

Christian Political Leadership, Hypocrisy, Duplicity, and Purposeful Evil

The current scandal involving Congressman Foley is merely the latest in an amazingly long list of blatant deception and duplicity by Republicans and the Christian Right in recent years. While bedeviling us all with their holier-than-thou pretenses, they consistently support and/or perform blatant greed and abominable evil. Never forget the extent of their arrogance over the last two decades and especially the last 6 years. It is beyond amazing that Christians continue to blindly support such obviously blatant scoundrels, even as they are repeatedly exposed going against the most basic of human values. The level of hypocrisy and duplicity boggles the mind. There is no longer any doubt, whatsoever, that Christianity is little more than a purposeful deception used by political and religious leaders to dupe, manipulate, and coerce entire populations into giving them wealth and power, which they always use for greed, injustice, and abominable evils.

The actions of Foley and those who covered up for him directly parallel the actions of scores of priests that have raped innocent children, preyed upon others for centuries, and had their actions hidden and abetted by the Vatican. Now, in eerie repetition of Vatican history, we have a power hungry Christian Emperor (GW) working closely with the Vatican and Judeo-Christian aristocrats to lead crusades in the so-called Holy Land. Furthermore, to leave little doubt about the reality of this assessment, the USA, as the new Holy Roman Empire, is about to legalize the torture it has perpetrated in recent years while steadily reversing many of the democratic and civil freedoms that people gained when the Vatican and royalty lost control of their European empire at the turn of the nineteenth century. Now we see them following the same old path of evil as they strive to cement the status of the USA as the latest proxy Vatican empire. Make no mistake about it, the new dark ages are looming on the horizon unless we do something proactive to prevent it.

Remember that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it!

Read More:
Here is Wisdom !!

Peace...

[Terrye]

I saw it on Pajamas. It seems the guy was 21 and it happened back in 2000, and of course the man wants to remain anonymous.

Oh hell, I admit. I had sex with Foley too. Why not? Everyone else gets to say it why not me?

We met in a bar. He mistook me for a boy, I mistook him a girl, we had been both been drinking and the next thing you know...

The shame of it all. I will never be the same. My life is ruined, all because of George Bush....I mean Foley...

[Sue]

Ms. Surprenant, who later worked for President Bush’s campaign in her native Minnesota, could not be reached for comment on Saturday.

What if she hadn't later worked for Presiden't Bush's campaign? What, then, would they have used to bring Bush's name into this?

[Sue]

we have a power hungry Christian Emperor (GW) working closely with the Vatican and Judeo-Christian aristocrats to lead crusades in the so-called Holy Land.

Ahhh...finally...a clue as to why CREW wants to know which Christian leaders have visited the WH.

Thanks. I was having trouble coming up with a reason for their request.

[Sue]

Cue scary music...

Make no mistake about it, the new dark ages are looming on the horizon unless we do something proactive to prevent it.

And I bet you typed that with a straight face. ::grin::

[Syl]

I'm getting a little bored with all of this. Normally I'd be just as interested in ferreting out stuff as anyone else.

But this isn't like the Plame case where we've had the luxury of literally years to play with it.

The election is only four weeks away and the stuff that will hurt the Dems will take longer to come out than that.

There's other stuff to talk about. Baker's proposal to split Iraq into three parts, for example. A RealPolitik move for sure. Short term (very short term) stability vs helping a society grow up and become a member of the real world.

And one of the ideas hitting the cable channels for consideration on election day is possible war with Iran. They're appealing to the anti-war base of the Dem party.

Besides, look at the poor polling for Reps since the Foley thing broke. I'm sure some of it is bogus, but still it doesn't look very good.

We should address that with the many reasons sitting on your hands on election day should not be an option.

CNN running stories about ALL the sex scandals over the years in Congress---sure fire way to give people faith in government and get to the polls. Yeah.

The Jonah Goldberg triangulation tactics, and the Podhoretz 'I give up, you win' posture are making the situation worse, not better.

And, Rick Ballard, if you read this I answered your post in the other thread. I suggest you read it. I was quoting Jonah Goldberg when you accused me of making the same mistake as he is. Take it up with him, not me.

According to Strategypage (or another place, I don't remember exactly) terrorist chatter is up again. But who gives a damn these days.

oh well, enought of that.

I'm just worried that this country has taken its eye off the ball. And if the Dems take at least the House we'll be sidetracked even more with domestic stuff and impeachment hearings. And they may attempt to defund Iraq.

[cboldt]

Mary Steyn - Page scandal makes America look silly

Still, I take my hat off to the media and Democratic Party. Indeed, in the spirit of Bill Clinton, I take my pants off to them. It is a remarkable achievement to have transformed, in little more than a week, the GOP into the Catholic Diocese of Boston with Speaker Hastert as Cardinal Law and the page program as the massed ranks of 7-year-old altar boys. What an awesome force the Dems would be if only the ruthless skill and cunning that went into this operation could be applied to, say, national security.

An exceptional number of outstanding turns of phrase, even for Steyn, who is a grand master.

Instead of outrage at Foley, maybe a better political response would have been to ridicule the Democrats for making an issue over "normal" sexually-tinged advances. There is nothing odd at all about a homosexual male making friendly advances on 16-18 year old young men.

[Syl]

One more thing. I think Pakistan is ready to blow. Another possible attempt on Musharraf. Those treaties signed with the Territories show weakness. I think he's lost the ISI and the country is in danger.

Expect to hear of more and more terrorist attacks inside Pakistan.

[cboldt]

-- Baker's proposal to split Iraq into three parts --

James Baker III? The guy who GWB has asked an opinion of? Is the "split into 3 parts" the same thing that Joe Biden has been advocating?

But yeah, the Foley affair is small potatoes in the grand scheme of things. But it does shed light on the inability of Republicans to handle manufactured crises.

[Patton]

Funny thing is BTW,

If it was discovered that a foriegn Al Queda terrorist had infiltrated the page program, Democrats would be demanding he be treated with the utmost respect and forbearance and his rights not be trampled on, etc. etc.

http://www.Lucianne.com has a great cartoon on their frontpage.

[Syl]

cboldt

Instead of outrage at Foley, maybe a better political response would have been to ridicule the Democrats for making an issue over "normal" sexually-tinged advances.

I like. And dare their voters to stay home on election day just because of this.

[cboldt]

-- sure fire way to give people faith in government --

Isn't the goal the opposite? To have people develop more self-reliance and LESS faith in government? I think the more obvious the bumbling, the better. Both major parties push for more faith in government. In that regard they are identical. "Trust US," they say, "because the other guy is not trustworthy."

[pagar]

"""""Remember that those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it""""""

That's exactly right-those who vote for Democrats are ignoring history. Democrats have told us for years, they will not defend America. If Democrats regain control in Nov, this nation will be undefended again.

[cboldt]

My "ridicule the Democrats for making this an issue" isn't tongue in cheek. It seems Foley's MO was to make friendly overtures, push for signs of mutual afffection, and back-away at signs the other person wasn't interested. Sure, 16 is young, and sure, there are all the "pwer" and "age" issues swirling around. But he wasn't hitting on current pages, and the pages that he ended up in more close exchanges and affairs with were willing participants. So? SOme parts of "normal" life are "dirty" in the eyes of Puritans. It's always been like that.

And if there is an issue with fraternization rules between ex-pages and Congresspeople (and their staffs), that issue is NOT limited to an investigation of Foley. Are we planning to limit freedom of association between ex-pages and Congressmen and their staffs? The answer is YES, but we haven't defined the limits of that freedom of association.

[Neo]

Oh hell, I admit. I had sex with Foley too.

I can see the T-shirt now.

[Syl]

cboldt

Thinking they're all bums in government makes one give up on all of it.

We must have faith in govt to perform certain duties, like national security, no?

Small govt conservatives and libertarians often forget that aspect.

[Semanticleo]

I don't want Hastert to go. He would be constant reminder, for the next few weeks,
of the true republican value system.

Anyway, they would only pick someone worse to replace him. Remember when the Senate replaced the Grand Dragon with Dr. Mengele?

[Neo]

I'm all for looking at the Protect the Children side of all of this.

I mean, in their zeal to out Rep. Foley, did any of the "Whistleblowers" bother to alert the page supervisors or the pages ?
Did the pages already know ?
And, how did they know (i.e. page supervisor, other pages, own best guess) ?

[Syl]

The resulting political and legal uproar is overshadowing the final weeks of campaigning for the midterm elections.

And here I thought 'full court press' was a basketball term.

[cboldt]

-- We must have faith in govt to perform certain duties, like national security, no? --

Hey, they are going to do what they think is right. I just have faith that bureaucracy is likely to be incompetent. "Have faith in government" isn't a party question. What, you don't have faith when the nominal leader is a DEM, but do have faith when it's a Republican?

I had another thought on the Foley matter, related to my earlier. Isn't it a bit putting the cart before the horse, to investigate the conduct before drawing the line between "acceptable" and "unacceptable?" After all , there are multiple instances of conduct here. E_mails to a 16 Y/O ex-page, IMs to other ex-pages, and a sex affair with a homosexual 12 Y/O ex-page. Are all of these unacceptable? Better inform the pages too, so they can better hide any unacceptable activities they choose (like the page who had the fake ID so he could drink - is he going to be prosecuted for that? If not, why not?).

[cboldt]

Dylexic, as usual, not 12 year old, make that 21 ;-)

[Patton]

"""I like. And dare their voters to stay home on election day just because of this. """

You can bet the Republicans will stay home. I mean look how badly they did when the media went with the Bush DUI story.

The there was the Bush TANG story, and the Bush WMD lies story, and the Bush outed CIA agent story, and the Cheney has a gay daughter story, etc. etc.

They kept the Republicans at home. Ha ha Ha

[Semanticleo]

Maguire may not broach this subject, so a little OT, but......

on MTP Russert interviewed Woodward and asked about Snow's allegations that many of his
allegations int "State of Denial" are one-sourced.

Eg. Cheny's meetings with kissinger.

Russert-"Did you talk to Cheney?"
W-"Yes"
Russer-'And...."
W-"Well he was upset that I was talking to thim about another subject..and that I shouldn't have used that for this book. I clearly outlined for the VP that this was 'on the record' at the beginning of the
interview. He said a word I can't say on TV and hung up.
R-"he said........"
W-"Bull..something.... and this is a metaphor for this administration. If you don't like or disagree with something....
JUST HANG UP!!!">>>>>>>>>>>>>

This is not a transcript but is pretty close to the real excahnge.

[Syl]

cboldt

I phrased it wrong. Instead of faith in government it should have been trust in your own elected representative.

Gets it closer to home rather than the overarching concerns of the role of government in general.

If the trust in your own representative/senator, based on your trust in his political party, is shot to hell, what are your options?

This is what the Dems are playing against the Reps with the Foley stuff.

[Syl]

Septic

LOL

Good for him!

And this upsets you, why?

Is there something wrong with calling an asshole an asshole?

I didn't think so.

[Neo]

Roger L. Simon comes out of the closet, so to speak

I cannot cover up any longer. This dual life has become intolerable. I am gay! There. I've said it. Doesn't that make you feel better, David?

[cboldt]

-- If the trust in your own representative/senator, based on your trust in his political party, is shot to hell, what are your options? --

My federal Senators are GOP-supported Snowe and Collins, and my representative is DEM-supported Tom "gap toothed goober" Allen.

So, no, I don't trust my representatives based on trust in their political party.

Fair question though, "what are my options?" I watch them like they are a circus act, merely for entertainment. I act in such a way so as to minimize my involvement with government, and thereby the effect of government on my personal life. Live clean, simple, and honest. I figure they can have 30-60% of whatever wealth I generate - it's a fair trade, as long as they keep up quality of entertainment.

[PeterUK]

"Eg. Cheny's meetings with kissinger."

More innuendo Septic,like the old song "I Wonder Who's Kissinger Now?"

[Neo]

Seven Star Hand (LW Page):
I don't have a link for it, but the highest award or settlement paided by an established church in regard to a molestation of the young by member of it's clergy was not paid by the Catholic Church.
The Vatican just get worse PR.

[cboldt]

-- Baker's proposal to split Iraq into three parts --

I'm still looking for this. I know the Iraq Study Group is supposed to have its recommendations out, and it's been reported that Baker has met with high level people in surrounding countries, but I haven't seen a report that asserts Baker has proposed splitting Iraq. Maybe he did, perhaps as one of several options that he later concludes is not optimal.

I agree, the Baker/Iraq discussion is much more important than Foley. Can you point to some URLs that give details? Insight Mag - Sept 12-18, http://bakerinstitute.org/, Iraq Study Group

[Patton]

Semanticleo,
you are going to need to interpret Meet The dePRESSed, we don't speak Lamestream.

[Jimmy's Attack Rabbit]

I know history starts for a Donk when they wake up in the morning but I seem to remember the Republicans campaigning on a sex scandal in 1998 which ended up with Newt resigning his office....Star Page, "History doen't repeat itself, it rhymes", (Samuel Clemens).

[Patton]

Semanticleo: ""Remember when the Senate replaced the Grand Dragon with Dr. Mengele?""

Ahh yes, when Robert Byrd, the ACTUAL KKK member who says, 'THERE ARE WHITE N-GGERS TOO" on National TV, gave up being the conscience of the Senate to Dr. Kennedy who performs best underwater.

[Terrye]

Syl:

This is true. I think it should be left to the Iraqis to decide what to do. Not Baker.

[Terrye]

Not only did Newt resign but the whole impeachment scenario backfired on the Republicans.

[Neo]

-- Baker's proposal to split Iraq into three parts --

There may be considering this, but according to the Turkish PM, it an non-starter. Turkey does not want an independent Kurdistan because eventually turkey would probably have to give up a portion of southeastern Turkey to the Kurds to get peace.

[Syl]

cboldt

re Iraq partition

I haven't researched links. I heard it this morning or last night on CNN. I hadn't previously associated Baker with the idea though it's hardly surprising.

Baker's been making the rounds on tv lately. So I assume this is a proposal (to whom?) that's current.

[Patton]

"""Not only did Newt resign but the whole impeachment scenario backfired on the Republicans.

Posted by: Terrye |""""

Backfired just how? Did Gore win? Was he President? Did the Republicans lose the House?

Democrats still don't see all the damage Clinton did to their Party. Go back and look where you were pre-Clinton and look what it has cost you to continue to defend the guy. The House, the Senate, the White House, the Governship and State House majorities, etc. etc.

[Syl]

Neo

That's true. Turkey is full on opposed to an independent Kurdistan.

Lots of Dems putting out the notion that we should consult all of Iraq's neighbors to hammer out a solution.

Sheeeeesh.

This is Iraq's problem, not Iran's. Iran does not want a democracy next door. Neither does Syria. I'm sure they have really really good advice for Iraq and a willingness to help solve Iraqi problems. Right.

The Iraqis VOTED their governmnet in and the Dems think OTHER countries should decide what iraq should do?

Dems are absolutely friggin' clueless about what is happening in Iraq. To them it's all car bombs in a total vacuum.

[clarice]

It's over except for some detective work.

At last, the saner portions of the Rep party (by which I DON'T mean Blankley and Malkin) were kicked into discarding their masochistic roles.

Now we can play detective but the people have moved on and it's time for the Reps to get on message.

Oh, another Dem October surprise is rather ruined by the collapse of this one--which if I may agree with PUK seems to have been generated by a 16 year old Louisiana pimple factory who was scared of gays and forgot to just say no.

[Rick Ballard]

Cboldt,

Don Surber points to a Sunday Times piece which raises the issue of division. Maybe Baker is floating the idea through the Times or maybe the Times has hired Karnak to divine others thoughts - who knows?

[Terrye]

Well people have decided that Iraq's government is a failure and they want to move on to the next thing they get to do to the Iraqi people.

This is ridiculous. The Iraqis will decide this. Not some writer for Newsweek or some exdiplomat from bygone days. If they think this is failed, what do they think Saddam's regime was? Just because he terrorized or bribed people into keeping their mouths shut does not mean the place was stable. It has never been stable or calm for that matter.

[clarice]

Frankly, I always thought it a good idea to consider a federal republic--with each of the three states given considerable right to set civil law--marriage, inheritance, self-governance with a national army and a Supreme Court to handle inter-state disputes and issues of national reach. The oil revenue--as Chalabi proposed--ought to be considered national with shares given to every Iraqi.
There is such a difference in the traditions and economic and civil development of the three regions it is hard to imagine consensus all the way down the line.

I don't know if it can work but I think the Iraqis ought to consider it. It works well here when we let it.

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

'I can see the T-shirt now.'

How about a bumpersticker: Honk if you've IMed a gay congressman?

[Syl]

Clarice

Frankly, I always thought it a good idea to consider a federal republic-

Yes, me too. The parliamentary system now will have the same problems as Lebanon possibly.

I simply disagree that Iraq should be separated into regions based on Kurd, sunni, shia. A recipe for more sectarian strife rather than less.

And remember that Baghdad is a mix which would make it impossible to separate out the sunni from the rest.

[Syl]

How about a bumpersticker: Honk if you've IMed a gay congressman?

LOL!

[Semanticleo]

How about a bumpersticker: Honk if you've IMed a gay congressman?

LOL!

Graveyard humor.

[clarice]

Patrick *Snack*
Syl--Make Baghdad a federal city--rather like DC but with voting rights in recognition of its different character and history.

There are lots of creative ways to do this--but to insist on one law even for something as simple as marriage rights covering such disparate areas is madness.

[clarice]

I'm too tired to scroll and put this on the right thread.

AJ has continued his dissection of the docs and concludes:

"Putting this all together the leak from Congress to the man who shopped
the emails to the media (starting with the St Petersburg Times) Had to
of
happened between 10/17/05 (when the last set were printed out) and
11/30/05.

This established WHEN the emails were leaked - making it nearly a year
for
the emails to hit the press. Clear case of withholding the
information."

http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/2665

[Semanticleo]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003294468_lawyer08.html

Lt Cmdr Swift gets his reward.

Aren't you all proud of the Republic (when it works) and the way it deals with the principles it preaches, but fails to practice
as an example to infant democracies, like Iraq?

[clarice]

OT: More evidence of Nifong's outrageous tactics--

http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2006/10/laughter-and-forgetting-in-durham.html

[hit and run]

Well, someone has to state the obvious regarding Tom's post.

Ms. Surprenant was not of interest to Mark Foley.

Foley wasn't interested in an XX scandal. He likes 'em XY.

[PeterUK]

Clarice,
"Syl--Make Baghdad a federal city--rather like DC but with voting rights in recognition of its different character and history."

Oh gawd! Ali Babba and the Forty Pages.

[clarice]

If I thwack you again with my nightstick it will break,OUK

[Sara (Squiggler)]

-- If the trust in your own representative/senator, based on your trust in his political party, is shot to hell, what are your options? --<-i>

My Senators are Boxer and Feinstein. Not much faith coming from me in their leadership. My Representative is Mary Bono, widow of Sonny Bono. In the years she has represented my District, I've heard one thing from or about her and that was in a TV ad I saw this week which was about a new highway project that is getting a lot of coverage around these parts. But other than that, nothing. No monthly or quarterly newsletters, no letters of any kind, not even ones looking for contributions. I don't think her seat is even remotely in jeopardy as this District is very Red, even though it is So. California.

Most of the attention in my neck of the woods is concentrated on the Governor's race and it doesn't seem like much of a race with Arnold up by about 13 points and Angeliddes looking like an idiot in last night's televised debate. As Hugh Hewitt said after the debate, even the LA Times couldn't find a way to spin it in Angeliddes favor. And you could hear the collective gags as Angeliddes was alluding to how wonderful a Speaker Pelosi would be.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

off damn spot

[Patton]

In your dreams, A REPUBLICAN CAN'T WIN CALIFORNIA, THE LEFT AND THE LAMESTREAM MEDIA HAVE BEEN TELLING US IDIOTS THAT FOR YEARS.

A clear democrat win in California which will never put a republican in office.

[Jane]

sara,

Think you have it bad? My senators are Kerry and Kennedy.

And there is not one republican on the ballot this year for federal office.

[anonymous]

Meanwhile Gay Democrats disillusioned with Hilary

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Jane, yep that is worse, at least Bono is a republican and although Arnold is kind of a bi-politico, he does have the (R) next to his name. If you look at the electoral map for Calif., you see all red except for the enclaves of L.A. and San Francisco/Marin Counties. I just wonder, if the Duke Cummingham seat remained in R hands even after his downfall, will voters put a pseudo-sex scandal over Cunningham's, doesn't seem likely, especially in the "anything goes" freelove California.

I think Republicans need to get out an ask one question, do you really want to elect a party that promotes the idea that if you are gay you are a child molester? This seems to be the new dem. line.

[clarice]

Well, who the heck cares? The gay lobby just shot itself in the head as the feminist movement did for Clinton.
Done. Yesterday. No more credible than the NEA and no more worth listening to .

[anonymous]

The oil revenue--as Chalabi proposed--ought to be considered national with shares given to every Iraqi.

Posted by: clarice | October 08, 2006 at 10:30 AM

A simple, Marxist proposal.

Would Mr. Chalabi's system work for the U.S. ? Shares for every American?

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Jane you do have Mitt Romney. I hope he runs in 2008. I will be onboard for his campagin in a heartbeat. He is my man for '08.

[anonymous]

Now we can play detective but the people have moved on ...

Posted by: clarice | October 08, 2006 at 10:21 AM

Two clear and reasonable thoughts in one day ...

(I wonder who sent out the memo.)

[hit and run]

(I wonder who sent out the memo.)

Duh. It was Tom. Who do you think signs our checks?

[clarice]

American taxpayers receive royalties for petroleum , too, anonymous, when the land from which it is extracted is owned by the federal government. I didn't suggest that private companies not profit off the development and extraction of Iraqi reserves, only that instead of sending all that tax dough to Baghdad where it will certainly corrupt, the money go to individual citizens--as it does BTW in Alaska with state derived tax revenues from petroleum.

[anon]

clarice

I was reading an article you have on The American Thinker. It links to a Free Republic thread where its said that Edmunds noted the ABC story on the page web site almost as soon as it came out. That seems to say that ABC had discussed the IM's with Edmunds before the story aired, correct?

If so, it seems like proof that ABC has been lying about the order in which things happened. But since nobody else is making note of it maybe I'm misreading things.

[anonymous]

American taxpayers receive royalties for petroleum , too, anonymous, when the land from which it is extracted is owned by the federal government.

You might want to look into what's happened with oil company payments to the federal government on those leases in the last six years.

"... instead of sending all that tax dough to Baghdad where it will certainly corrupt, the money go to individual citizens ..."

Are you suggesting that the government of Iraq is corrupt?

[anonymous]

And the little that is paid on leases for use of federal land in the U.S. is not divided and sent to individual citizens. The money goes to the federal government.

[JM Hanes]

Clarice:

I put the following together in response to comments in the previous thread, before your announcement that the people, not just the discussion, had moved on!

I think it would help to distinguish between excerpts and redactions.

CREW's PDF only includes one original email from Foley to the LA page. Emails #2-5 are not forwarded originals. They contain excerpts from Foley originals typed or pasted into separate emails.

When the FBI said it received heavily redacted emails from CREW, I don't think they were referring to blacked out headers at all. I think they were referring to the fact that they were given excerpted material. I.E., since all the ellipses technically represent redacted content, emails #2-5 are, in fact, "heavily redacted."

We are assuming #2-5 were sent this way to Alexander's office by the page because they are included in the CREW collection. In reality, however, we have no way of knowing whether the page himself did the excerpting or whether it was done by someone else.

It's possible that the page didn't want to include messages #2-5 in their entirety for any number of reasons. I'm just not sure why he would go to the trouble of composing 4 separate emails for the excerpted material instead of just putting it all in one longer message labeled 2-5, although I suppose he could have been asked to do it that way. It makes even less sense, however, given the fact that he had already provided extensive excerpts in the original exchange (p.1-3 of CREW's PDF) -- which concluded on August 31, 2005 with "OK. I am forwarding them now." Empasis mine.

I suspect that the LA page actually did forward emails 2-5 to Alexander's office, but that what we're seeing are excerpts put together for transmission elsewhere. The possible reasons for doing so could be entirely benign, btw -- it could have been intended to protect the identity of the page when requesting that action be taken, for example.

It might help to keep in mind that CREW's PDF is a compilation of what look like 6 separate documents. Document #1 is the exchange that ended on 8/ 31/05. That document is numbered "Page 1 of 3" etc. on the upper right, and dated (lower left )10/17/05 -- which presumably indicates printing or transmission. The remaining documents containing the forwarded email and the emailed excerpts are each labeled "Page 1 of 1" and dated 9/13/05. They were all then either compiled and/or transmitted as a whole in a 9 page document (of which we have pp.2-9) on 5/29/06. BTW, this would push AJ's possible start date for the email shopping back by a month to 9/13/05.

[anonymous]

And so much for "the people have moved on ... , " Nancy Drew.

[cboldt]

I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that ellipses in Foley's writing represents excerpted material. It seems he used ellipses in his casual typing, as a manner of pause or paragraph break.

The media/Democrat template (media being by and large comrised of DEM activists) is that the Republican voters will be so embarrassed by the scandal that they won't vote. -yawn-

[Bob]

ahhhh septics back doing what she does best... I guess the clinic is closed today. I hope with the holiday tomorrow, you won't need to wait until Tuesday for your meds.

[anonymous]

It is really ripe saying the Democrats have the same attitude to gays as the Iranian Ayatollahs,Dems don't push walls on them,they push them under the bus.

[Syl]

anon

I was reading an article you have on The American Thinker. It links to a Free Republic thread where its said that Edmunds noted the ABC story on the page web site almost as soon as it came out. That seems to say that ABC had discussed the IM's with Edmunds before the story aired, correct?

Well, actually, ABC said they tracked down the original IMer, and verfied the IM was legit. Thus ABC must have spoken with Edmunds and he had a heads up.

Nothing suspicious there (except for the identify of the person who handed the IMs to ABC).

[Bob]

Yeah and if you want proof anonymous, go over to the http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2344415>DU and read how they do it!

Troll for 'em when they're minors. Bag 'em when they're of age. Probably legal but it's still predatory and disgusting.

[Sara (Squiggler)]

Let's">http://levin.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NmY2MjczM2U2NGZmYjEzZGY4MzY4NjI2YzUxODFiNjY=">Let's take a break

I, too, almost lost my breakfast.

[anon]

Syl

ABC said they tracked down the original IMer, and verfied the IM was legit.

ABC said that after the email story was released, they were contacted by people who provided the IM's. These were not the people involved in the IM's. ABC would have had to release the story, then be contacted by the parties in possession of the IM's, then contacted Edmunds and another party to confirm.

If Edmunds was contacted by ABC prior to the email story being released, which seems to be the case, then ABC is lying when it claims that it did know about the IM's until after.

[anonymous]

In November, you will have the opportunity to vote ABC out of office.

[clarice]

jmh--the document thing is way over my head. Why note send that to AJ?

It's a very important part of the story, it's just one I can't manage.

[Sarah]

Have you seen this?
http://www.goedwardsville.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17296433&BRD
Trandahl had his own copy of the Foley emails! The page's parents emailed them to him! Slim Guy will love this!

Sara, how ya doin?

[clarice]

SG will--He caught it to and emailed me. I suggested he post that message here.(Maybe it explains why the ABS and CREW docs are different?)

[JM Hanes]

cboldt:

"I wouldn't jump to the conclusion that ellipses in Foley's writing represents excerpted material."

I'm saying that you're not actually looking at Foley's email at all, you're looking at extracts from a presumed original. The only forwarded original in the CREW collection is the first one.

[JM Hanes]

The first one above meaning the first of the five messages (asking "do I have the right email").

[hit and run]

And to think, it was just a few weeks ago that ABC was part of the VRWC by airing Path to 9/11.

The dems even threatened to yank ABCs broadcast license.

I bet those dems are thanking their lucky stars they didn't follow through with that threat.

[President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad]

Greetings to our Democratic brothers in America,we congratulate you on finding the true path to righteousness,Sharia.
We thank you for providing so much mirth in Iran and indeed all the lands of the Mid East ,The Great Satan with its pants down.

[PeterUK]

"In November, you will have the opportunity to vote ABC out of office."

Or even out of the closet.

[Neo]

One other point that has not been addressed in the events surrounding Rep Foley, is the loss of confidentiality.

Just as the White House employees of the Bush-41 and Reagan administrations whose FBI files were wrongly accessed by the Clinton White House, caused my folks to give pause prior to answering FBI questions lest they become public fodder, rendering an egregious loss confidentiality and an invasion of privacy.

Now comes the loss of confidentiality for any one sending information to at least the House, if not the Senate as well. The LA page found out the hard way that those e-mails he sent into the House via his local Congressmen, arrives at a den of spies where information is copied and copied and resent till it finds the point of political usefulness and is exploited for political gain. This disregard for citizens confidentiality is the shame of the House. This shame is bipartisan, although it seems to do a better job manifesting itself of the Democratic side of the aisle.

[JM Hanes]

Clarice:

The main point is that CREW's PDF includes only one original Foley email, not five. The first email appears to have been forwarded in its entirety. The other four are quoting from presumed originals.

[Tom Maguire]

If it was discovered that a foriegn Al Queda terrorist had infiltrated the page program, Democrats would be demanding he be treated with the utmost respect and forbearance and his rights not be trampled on, etc. etc.

If Foley had been canny enough to propose marriage to one of these pages, Dems would be sponsoring parades in his honor and naming statues after him.

Oh, well. This, the Yankees - but the weather is making it a nice day for everyone. Everyone else, that is...

[Sarah]

JMH

I'm with cboldt. I don't think the ellipses
"represent redacted content." It's a casual, sloppy way of writing, along with improper punctuation, spelling, and capitalization. It's what linguists decry about electronic communication. He used it in his IM's too:
"i am in pensecola...had to catch a plane"

[PeterUK]

If someone sends me $100,000 I will forward a genuine copy of the only $9 note in existance.

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

'Would Mr. Chalabi's system work for the U.S. ? Shares for every American?'

It works for Alaskans. And Clarice has Milton Friedman on her side too.

Tom, it could get worse. I hear the Curse of the Pinella' might be added to the Curse of the A-Rod.

[Syl]

Sarah

It's a casual, sloppy way of writing,

Well that's how I used to write...really. It's how I used to connect quick thoughts. Did it all the time. Not sloppy, just my style.

::ducking::

[Sarah]

Syl,

i dont decry it, linguists do...i do it all the time to.

[topsecretk9]

Just curious, the FBI said they believed CREW had the emails since April, could this had come to the FBI from the person who gave them to CREW in April?

[clarice]

I wrote a piece that sould be up tomorrow on AT comparing CREWs role in the Manny Miranda case with its role in the Foley case. Surprise ! When it suited the Dems to downplay the substance of the legally obtained leaked corruption of Kennedy et al they were against leaking stuff from Congressional files. Here, where there are only dubious claims against a signle, now resigned Congressman THEY are playing a role in leaking it and demanding we pay attention to the substance not how they got it.

And both time there are dumbassed Reps falling for it.