The Foley Scandal.
Hastert said he huddled with his staff members last week and he believes they acted appropriately in handling information on Foley's conduct. But he also issued them a stern warning: "If they did cover something up, then they should not continue to have their jobs."
Here's the whole article
So, does this apply to Hastert himself? Any of the other congressional members whose names have popped up over the course of the last couple of weeks? Or does it only apply to flunkies? I'd love to see his response to that question. Is anyone out there in a position to interview him, and ask that question?
You know, someone pointed out to me last week (and I've done a little digging to back it up), it does not appear that any laws were broken here. No one has offered anything more than pure speculation that Foley had sexual relations with any of the pages. Heck, I'm having a hard time finding confirmation that Foley ever showed any grossly inappropriate behaviour toward a page at all (most of the accusations and evidence clearly says that the boys involved were all former pages, and that Foley contacted them after they left Washington - please note that I'm commenting on the timing, not the behaviour). So, we're rapidly approaching the point where the issue of what Foley did is irrelevant. What is important, and will really tighten the focus, is who lied under oath, who suppressed evidence, and who quashed an investigation. Is this starting to sound familiar?
I predict that no evidence will be found that anyone suppressed anything, unless it is Foley himself, or possibly someone in Foley's office (since Foley, and by association his office staff, have already been thrown to the wolves). I feel it's very likely that everyone currently in office, and their staff, did their absolute best to ensure that they didn't know anything that could be damaging, even if it required sticking their fingers in their ears and humming really really loudly. "Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?" Over 800 years old, and it still works like a charm.
Anyway, I just thought I'd share my views on the subject. What are yours?
Alex
Here's the whole article
So, does this apply to Hastert himself? Any of the other congressional members whose names have popped up over the course of the last couple of weeks? Or does it only apply to flunkies? I'd love to see his response to that question. Is anyone out there in a position to interview him, and ask that question?
You know, someone pointed out to me last week (and I've done a little digging to back it up), it does not appear that any laws were broken here. No one has offered anything more than pure speculation that Foley had sexual relations with any of the pages. Heck, I'm having a hard time finding confirmation that Foley ever showed any grossly inappropriate behaviour toward a page at all (most of the accusations and evidence clearly says that the boys involved were all former pages, and that Foley contacted them after they left Washington - please note that I'm commenting on the timing, not the behaviour). So, we're rapidly approaching the point where the issue of what Foley did is irrelevant. What is important, and will really tighten the focus, is who lied under oath, who suppressed evidence, and who quashed an investigation. Is this starting to sound familiar?
I predict that no evidence will be found that anyone suppressed anything, unless it is Foley himself, or possibly someone in Foley's office (since Foley, and by association his office staff, have already been thrown to the wolves). I feel it's very likely that everyone currently in office, and their staff, did their absolute best to ensure that they didn't know anything that could be damaging, even if it required sticking their fingers in their ears and humming really really loudly. "Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?" Over 800 years old, and it still works like a charm.
Anyway, I just thought I'd share my views on the subject. What are yours?
Alex