HRC (gay rights group) Fires Staffer Who Orchestrated Foley Scandal

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Edit for Starbuck . . . WHO 'waited a few months?'

I was responding to the allegations that the website which leaked the emails had them since early summer, yet chose until only recently to "expose" the scandal.

I would be curious to know who started the StopSexPredators website, and their political allegiances.

If this site was created with the intent of launching an "October surprise," then shame on them.

Technically, it was a September surprise but it wasn't surprising to several Republican Congressmen or their staffers that have known about Foley for years. It wasn't a surprise to CREW b/c they tried to get the FBI to do something in July.

You would have a better argument if you went after Sherwood's mistress . . .

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Aisengard

Originally posted by: JD50

Originally posted by: Aisengard
So tell me, how do these nothings get important information about a Congressman while Hastert doesn't? And does this make Tom Reynolds a liar when he says he passed emails along to his boss? What would have happened if this person never posted these emails?

Don't forget that the government can do scary things to nothings who expose things about them. So yeah, it had to be carefully orchestrated so the person who posted it didn't suddenly 'disappear' so Hastert and his ilk could continue to sit on the information that they had.

I'm just curious, when has the Government made people "dissapear"?

You don't really know how the CIA works, do you.

I'm going out on a limb here to guess that you dont have a clue either. Did/Do you work for the CIA? the NSA? the FBI? NRO? NGA? DHS? DIA? DEA?....

no? I didnt think so... so again, if you would, please tell all of us "how the CIA works"...

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
OK, now who on the Deomcratic side were responsible for this?

That's disingenious... This is akin to the swiftboat vets. What Republicans were responsible for that? It didn't matter that nobody could give an R name they got blamed anyway. There probably wont be a specific Democrat or Democrat group to assign to this group either but they were obviously operating on behalf of them.

Bush was responsible for the swift boaters if for no other reason then that he didn't put a stop to the lying once he became aware of it.

And where is the Dems outrage at this group covering up Foley's actions?

It wasn't just this group, now was it. The R's new long ago also, but did nothing.

Pot, Kettle, Black.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
By your logic I guess Woodward and Bernstein orchestrated Watergate?

How long did Woodward and Bernstein sit on the information before making it public? Answer: less than one month. I wonder why this "blogger" waited more than 4 months...until October... hmm...?

I'm not excusing the behavoir of Foley or the Republican leadership, but that doesnt mean that I dont believe October's sketchy release of the info was a coincidence...

 

[StepUp]

Originally posted by: Pens1566
Another great thread brought to by Prof. BTW, don't bother coming in if you're looking for the truth, we only want to discuss the political timing of the emails. Heaven forbid they're actually true and this jackass is/was a predator. That's not what's important here.

For the OP:



An even dozen

A bakers dozen! I have a feeling it's the professor's real occupation!

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
OK, now who on the Deomcratic side were responsible for this?

That's disingenious... This is akin to the swiftboat vets. What Republicans were responsible for that? It didn't matter that nobody could give an R name they got blamed anyway. There probably wont be a specific Democrat or Democrat group to assign to this group either but they were obviously operating on behalf of them.

Bush was responsible for the swift boaters if for no other reason then that he didn't put a stop to the lying once he became aware of it.

And where is the Dems outrage at this group covering up Foley's actions?

It wasn't just this group, now was it. The R's new long ago also, but did nothing.

Pot, Kettle, Black.

Good grief... I've already addressed this. Go back and read my original post where that conversation started. A little context might help ya.

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Foley was wrong... period. He earned his fate.

The Republicans were wrong for closing their eyes and hoping it would all go away. And they deserve what they get for the cover up.

The people who released the story were wrong for hypocritically sitting on the whole affair while waiting for the most opportune time to release it and then screaming "Oh n0es... Look at the Republican cover up!" In that respect they are just as guilty for enabling Foley and covering up his activities as Hastert was.

Everyone in this situation (except for the pages) come out of this covered in slime.

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium
The only people who "orchestrated" the Foley scandal are Foley, who carried out the abuse, and the Republicans who conspired to cover it up. End of story.

It sounds like both sides conspired to cover it up.

Name some of the Democrats please so we know who they are!

I havev no names. I just hate coincidences when the information is sat on for political gain.

We know that the Repub leadership played ostrich in some fashion.

The question is who was to benifit by this information not being exposed to the media at the time that it was available; rather than 1 month before the elections..

That is the "other" side. This does need to be a Dem but the timing is very suspicious.

There are many people who feel the NeoCons orchestrated 9/11. I guess they are right too, if you are, without providing one scintilla of evidence to support your claim. At least the 9/11 conspiracy folks have some evidence.

What/Where

Heh. Google it sometime. It's probably about as accurate as the evidence you are using to support your viewpoint.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
OK, now who on the Deomcratic side were responsible for this?

That's disingenious... This is akin to the swiftboat vets. What Republicans were responsible for that? It didn't matter that nobody could give an R name they got blamed anyway. There probably wont be a specific Democrat or Democrat group to assign to this group either but they were obviously operating on behalf of them.

Bush was responsible for the swift boaters if for no other reason then that he didn't put a stop to the lying once he became aware of it.

And where is the Dems outrage at this group covering up Foley's actions?

It wasn't just this group, now was it. The R's new long ago also, but did nothing.

Pot, Kettle, Black.

Good grief... I've already addressed this. Go back and read my original post where that conversation started. A little context might help ya.

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Foley was wrong... period. He earned his fate.

The Republicans were wrong for closing their eyes and hoping it would all go away. And they deserve what they get for the cover up.

The people who released the story were wrong for hypocritically sitting on the whole affair while waiting for the most opportune time to release it and then screaming "Oh n0es... Look at the Republican cover up!" In that respect they are just as guilty for enabling Foley and covering up his activities as Hastert was.

Everyone in this situation (except for the pages) come out of this covered in slime.

ANd I previously wrote:

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Anybody remember the S&L rip-off? That was know about months before the election, but supressed until after the election. Yopu have to wonder if John Q. Public had know all about Neil Bush and the Silverado S&L if daddy Bush would have been elected President.

Or the Swift Boat Veterans for the "Truth"? The last thing they were interested in was the truth, but GWB sure played dumb about that one.

You right wingers have sure turned into the big bunch of whiners. It seems you can dish it out, but can't take it.

I never said what this group did was right. I'm saying pot meet kettle. The right's crys of foul falls on deaf ears as far as I'm concerned.

 

[halik]

oh yeah that page totally made him do it :roll:
We all know that reality has a notable liberal bias...

orchestrated != exposed

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
By your logic I guess Woodward and Bernstein orchestrated Watergate?

How long did Woodward and Bernstein sit on the information before making it public? Answer: less than one month. I wonder why this "blogger" waited more than 4 months...until October... hmm...?

I'm not excusing the behavoir of Foley or the Republican leadership, but that doesnt mean that I dont believe October's sketchy release of the info was a coincidence...

Trust me . . . I would never imply that someone is 'excusing' Foley's behavior by merely inquiring about the circumstances as to 'how' and 'when' it went public. BUT . . . the implication by the OP is that emails in the possession of some gay blogger is the ONLY reason there's a Foley scandal and the ONLY reason it didn't come to light until late September. It's an argument specious to the extent of being laughable. Everything that was available PRIOR to late September raised significant questions about Foley's behavior. MANY people including press, politicians, staffers, FBI, and CREW had access to questionable material ranging from early summer going back several years.

This guy that HRC canned clearly has it out for Foley (and probably the GOP) but I haven't seen anything that would suggest he was 'connected' to any of the other people or organizations that could have (and should have) gone public much earlier.

You cannot 'orchestrate' that which you have no control over. The OP is just plain silly.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
The OP is just plain silly.

I doubt many members here would dispute that. I must admit I wonder who he was before he was banned.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

Originally posted by: palehorse74

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
By your logic I guess Woodward and Bernstein orchestrated Watergate?

How long did Woodward and Bernstein sit on the information before making it public? Answer: less than one month. I wonder why this "blogger" waited more than 4 months...until October... hmm...?

I'm not excusing the behavoir of Foley or the Republican leadership, but that doesnt mean that I dont believe October's sketchy release of the info was a coincidence...

Trust me . . . I would never imply that someone is 'excusing' Foley's behavior by merely inquiring about the circumstances as to 'how' and 'when' it went public. BUT . . . the implication by the OP is that emails in the possession of some gay blogger is the ONLY reason there's a Foley scandal and the ONLY reason it didn't come to light until late September. It's an argument specious to the extent of being laughable. Everything that was available PRIOR to late September raised significant questions about Foley's behavior. MANY people including press, politicians, staffers, FBI, and CREW had access to questionable material ranging from early summer going back several years.

This guy that HRC canned clearly has it out for Foley (and probably the GOP) but I haven't seen anything that would suggest he was 'connected' to any of the other people or organizations that could have (and should have) gone public much earlier.

You cannot 'orchestrate' that which you have no control over. The OP is just plain silly.

ok, fair enough. that said, let's play devil's advocate: WHAT IF it turns out that the gay blogger who sat on the info IS connected directly to the Democratic Party in some way? What if that turns out to be true?

IF that were the case, do you honestly think that the people here would condemn their own for doing so?

my guess is that they'd tuck tail and ignore it, or excuse the act by calling it "payback"...

just being hypothetical of course... i just cant rule out the possibility that this might happen.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: PrevaricatorJohn
Once again the ideologues at P&N are missing the point of this thread.

The question is the political motivations behind this story.

BULLSH8!!! We know the story is true. Foley admits it, and even you agree that his actions are dispicable. That means, who broke the story, or their motives for doing so, or even when they did it are all irrelevant, and we owe them a debt of gratitude.

Should we reinstate Foley to Congress? Should we excuse any Republican in a position of responsibility who knew about Foley and did nothing, or worse, actively tried to cover up the story? :roll:

Since you're the one who started this thread, your only obvious "point" is yet another of your lame attempts to distract attention from the far more important issue of whether and when Dennis Hastert or any other top Republican leaders knew about Foley's predatory behavior toward the pages.

Little boy, YOU ARE PATHETIC!

 

[Pens1566]

Let's say the one who broke the story with the emails sat on it for a time to maximize political impact. Let's also say they enter alcohol rehab, is it ok then?????

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Politically this scandal is dead.

I doubt anything will come to the light before the election that will change any votes.

However, it will be very interesting to see what happens post election as the fall out continues.

The FBI is on this case and I am sure they will be looking to talk to the guy who posted this stuff on his "fake blog"

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: PrevaricatorJohn
Once again the ideologues at P&N are missing the point of this thread.

The question is the political motivations behind this story.

BULLSH8!!! We know the story is true. Foley admits it, and even you agree that his actions are dispicable. That means, who broke the story, or their motives for doing so, or even when they did it are all irrelevant, and we owe them a debt of gratitude.

Should we reinstate Foley to Congress? Should we excuse any Republican in a position of responsibility who knew about Foley and did nothing, or worse, actively tried to cover up the story? :roll:

Since you're the one who started this thread, your only obvious "point" is yet another of your lame attempts to distract attention from the far more important issue of whether and when Dennis Hastert or any other top Republican leaders knew about Foley's predatory behavior toward the pages.

Little boy, YOU ARE PATHETIC!

Actually we should be honored that we have Whitehouse staffers frequenting this Forum.

I'd love to know how much this guy is getting paid by Rove.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: ProfJohn

Politically this scandal is dead.

I doubt anything will come to the light before the election that will change any votes.

However, it will be very interesting to see what happens post election as the fall out continues.

The FBI is on this case and I am sure they will be looking to talk to the guy who posted this stuff on his "fake blog"

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: PrevaricatorJohn
Once again the ideologues at P&N are missing the point of this thread.

The question is the political motivations behind this story.

BULLSH8!!! We know the story is true. Foley admits it, and even you agree that his actions are dispicable. That means, who broke the story, or their motives for doing so, or even when they did it are all irrelevant, and we owe them a debt of gratitude.

Should we reinstate Foley to Congress? Should we excuse any Republican in a position of responsibility who knew about Foley and did nothing, or worse, actively tried to cover up the story? :roll:

Since you're the one who started this thread, your only obvious "point" is yet another of your lame attempts to distract attention from the far more important issue of whether and when Dennis Hastert or any other top Republican leaders knew about Foley's predatory behavior toward the pages.

Little boy, YOU ARE PATHETIC!

Actually we should be honored that we have Whitehouse staffers frequenting this Forum.

I'd love to know how much this guy is getting paid by Rove.

You're little shill game is getting a little old. Someone can actually disagree with you and NOT be a shill. You guys are making yourselves look silly, calling people "little boy" and "shills" and "bigots" just because they have a different view than you is really pathetic.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
NOTE: If you are not interested in the details about how the Foley scandal started and the origin of the e-mails that hit the press, then save yourself some time and go away.

Since the Foley scandal broke I have questioning how the scandal started and where the e-mails originated.
Now it looks like the creator of the StopSexPredators blog has been found. And it looks ugly.
A blog called "Stop October Surprises" has traced the ownership of the blog to someone who works for "Human Rights Campaign" a group who purpose is "Working for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender equal rights."....................

Interesting find. And yes, it does look like the disclosure was purposefully delayed/timed to be an 'October Surprise", but really that was expected by most.

I do wish that they would distinguish between the two different sets of communications, if only for clarity. The ones I prefer to call "emails" were overly friendly but not lewd. The other set of communications I prefer to call "IM's" (to help distinguish between the two.) were quite lurid.

I am assuming this site is referring to the leak/release of the lurid messages (IM's) even they say "emails". So, I would be interested to see how these private IM's came to be in the possession of the HRC? Were they forwarded by the young man, or stolen off Foley's laptop, or hacked/intercepted through a server (if possible?)?. Until it can be proven that they were not "stolen" from Foley I think it possible a national security issue may lurking somewhere here.

To those who don't see any Dem connection to this, if you read the links it is very clear that HRC is now run by highly partisan Democrats. To claim a connection must be made to an elected Dem politition is silly. Rush Limbaugh has never been elected to anything but you frequently refer to his antics as "Republican" smear tactics etc.

To those who claim a Repub cover-up, until there is evidence that Hastert et al were aware of the lurid IM's (as oposed to the overly friendly emails) that charge won't stick unless you're rabid Dem partisan and simply wish it so very badly.

There is some speculation in these links that the half-dozen gay Repub staffers may have shielded "one of their own", but again until it is clear that they were aware of the lurid IM's it's only interesting speculation.

Oh, and as far as an "October Surprise" I suppose it could qualify as that. But I think the point was to ensure that Foley would lose his seat to a Democrat, rather than influence the election nation-wide. This story is already "old news", I expect little to no effect on other candidates. Of more import I think is whether Negron we be able to post signs informing voters that a vote for Foley is actually a vote for Negron. Simple voter info.

I've been checking P&N, but so far no discussion of whether the Dems efforts to prevent simple non-partisan information (who they would be actrualy voting for) is appropriate or not. I think not.

Fern

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: JD50
You're little shill game is getting a little old. Someone can actually disagree with you and NOT be a shill. You guys are making yourselves look silly, calling people "little boy" and "shills" and "bigots" just because they have a different view than you is really pathetic.

"Different" is one thing. Straight out lies and distractions like PrevaricatorJohn's are quite another. Calling him "little boy" was just an expression of my contempt for him, which is quite real and quite well based in fact, but I think the rest of my post made that pretty clear.

I don't know if he's a Whitehouse staffer, but I won't argue with Dave's view that he's a "shill," either. :thumbsup:

If you have a problem with that, it's your problem.

 

[umbrella39]

Other than the OP, who cares what the "political motivations" behind this story are? At least it did not cost the taxpayers millions, as it has *cough cough* in the past, to expose the "political motivations" . . .

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
The OP is just plain silly.

I doubt many members here would dispute that. I must admit I wonder who he was before he was banned.

I was thinking CadSortaGuy reincarnated ... but hey, that's just me.

In any event, let's play devil's advocate for one second here as some other posters have done. Let's say hypothetically, these Democratic-linked bloggers were in possession of the emails and IMs for a good long time and simply chose to time their release to maximize damage to Foley and the GOP a mere month or month and a half before mid-term elections? So what? Obviously Hastert and most of the GOP leadership knew this was going on to varying degrees for quite some time too. They chose (for whatever reason) to do nothing about it and/or to even cover it up until after the elections.

Even if this hypothetical were true, you'd still have two parties working adversely to each other, one trying to publicly reveal what this potential sexual predator was up to and one party trying to at best, work the issue out internally, at worst trying to cover it up.

How is this hypothetical situation any better for the GOP?

 

[dahunan]

Political unterests are what fueled the whole thing - the greek pages wanted to be in politics.. and foley the politician wanted to be in them too

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
The OP is just plain silly.

I doubt many members here would dispute that. I must admit I wonder who he was before he was banned.

I was thinking CadSortaGuy reincarnated ... but hey, that's just me. [/b]

I doubt it. CsG was a higher-quality poster IMO. The only thing they seem to have in common is delusions of persecution.

 

[Art Vandelay]

Hey ProfJohn, got news for you: we don't care who hid the scandal, who shed light on to it, etc. All I care is who tried to molest those pages: Foley, a Republican.

/End thread.

 

[ProfJohn]

Some comments:
1. On this being ?Orchestrated? It is being ?orchestrated? in that the release of the e-mail was timed. Imagine if that Osama tape people keep talking about pops up a few days before he election, and we learn that the CIA had possession of the tape for a few weeks/months and was analyzing it for content etc before releasing it.
Now Bush and Republicans would have NOTHING to do with the creation of the tape, nor with whatever it is Osama says (most likely it will be Osama saying ?vote for Democrats? of course) However, I am 100% certain that someone will claim that the release of the tape was orchestrated by the Republicans for maximum political effect.

2. On the whole Democrat thing. I am pretty certain that we will learn that the person who released this e-mail is in some way involved with the guy going around with the ?list? of gay Republicans. The whole point of this list is to out any gay Republican who may be in the closet. They are doing that because this group thinks that any gay who supports the Republicans is akin to a race traitor. The things they post about people like Foley (and this was long before the page incident came to light) are highly disgusting.
They essentially believe that being gay and Republican makes you partner to gays being beat, killed, shot or suffering any other type of hate crime.
Now this group is not some group of independent voters are some of you would like to claim, they are very much members of the Democratic Party.
So far we have NO proof that any elected Democrat, or any staffer knew about this planned scandal, but who knows what we will find out as time goes by.

3. I have never defended Mark Foley for what he did. He is a disgrace to congress (which is a hard thing to do given who serves there) and a disgrace to his party. It is a shame that more action was taken about him and his tendency to be overly friendly with pages years ago, but sadly that is not what happened.

 

[ProfJohn]

NOTE: To all of you who don't give a crap, go away! I don't post on your threads if I don't care.

Some evidence that the e-mails were sitting around waiting for the right time to be released.
Link
From "blogactive" March 2005

I've thought hard about what kind of TAKE ACTION would work, but there is really is none right now. Everyone already knows Foley's a self hating closet case. When we get closer to the mid-term elections, I am sure more will surface.

Seems to me that they are hinting at something. hmmmm could be coincidence. However, this site had already "outed" Foley earlier.
Link

Also, the New York Times is calling HRC "A liberal gay rights group" Liberal usually means Democrat, but you never know.

BTW: if the Times is reporting on this story it must be at least a little important huh?