Oh, Geez !!??!! - Page 5

Nathans_Dad · Nathans_Dad's Garage

Hastert has already "addressed" that. He says his staff knew but he didn't

.

Like I said on the other thread, Hastert should resign. I'm just wondering which Democrats got their little hands dirty during this ambush...

Rikao4 · 10-04-2006, 01:42 PM

Rick's rat is going to stink up the House big time.
Rika

Nathans_Dad · Nathans_Dad's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by nostatic
But Rogers isn't an elected official (nor does he work for one). Sure, he should have done the right thing, but he is not held to the same standard as a congressman and their staff.

That's true and if Rogers acted alone without any knowledge from a DNC staffer then I guess the Democrats are off the hook. I'm not so sure he acted without anyone's help though...plus he openly admits he was not the primary actor in bringing out this story.

More shoes to fall, me thinks.

nostatic · nostatic's Garage

Clearly the Repubs had a lot to lose, and hence an incentive to cover up, and the Dems had a lot to gain, and hence an incentive to cover up then release now.

The thing is that right now we *know* that there was knowledge on the Repub side of things. And we know that some activists knew. But we have yet to have any evidence that an elected Dem or their staff knew. I agree with you that likely a shoe will drop in that camp, but my guess is that the Repub side will be more Imelda-ish, and that will swamp out the other stuff

Jim Richards · 10-04-2006, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
I'm just wondering which Democrats got their little hands dirty during this ambush...

+1

Rodeo · 10-04-2006, 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by lendaddy
***I bet the difference is that I've heard Hastert first hand explain his knowledge and I believe him. You've only read about it.

And I've heard both Reynolds and Boehner point the finger at the Speaker.

So the Majority Leader and and Chair of the RCC are lying then?

Why aren't you demanding that THEY be ousted?

You want it all ways, daddy. First you wanted to read the emails (but couldn't seem to find them yourself). Then you wanted to know they had been transmitted to the Speaker's office (no one disputes that they were).

Then you wanted to actually place them in the Speaker's hands.

Next you'll want proof that the Speaker can read.

Give it up. You credibility is shot.

These guys covered up ... they had $100,000 reasons (given to the RCC by Foley in JULY) ... not to mention all the trappings of power that come with being in the majority.

red-beard · red-beard's Garage

Yes, but did you know what I know before you knew what they knew you knew?

lendaddy · 10-04-2006, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rodeo

Give it up. You credibility is shot.

Jim Richards · 10-04-2006, 01:55 PM

red, he may not have, but I knew you knew.

nostatic · nostatic's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by red-beard
Yes, but did you know what I know before you knew what they knew you knew?

oh sure, bring logic into the discussion...

Rodeo · 10-04-2006, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by lendaddy

Answer the question this time. A "rollseyes" won't do.

Quote:

Originally posted by Rodeo
And I've heard both Reynolds and Boehner point the finger at the Speaker.

So the Majority Leader and and Chair of the RCC are lying then?

Why aren't you demanding that THEY be ousted?

hunter914 · 10-04-2006, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
Hastert has already "addressed" that. He says his staff knew but he didn't .

Like I said on the other thread, Hastert should resign. I'm just wondering which Democrats got their little hands dirty during this ambush...

How far down the rabbit hole do you want to go?

Given the neocon's track record and stated agenda, I'd look a few months down the road to see what happens with the Amendment banning gay marriage. Foley is the posterboy for why we NEED this Amendment. no, this whole thing was orchestrated by the Right to achieve objectives otherwise unattainable. oh the outrage!

I will say it is interesting the incredible amount of energy that goes into these discussions. If there were only a way to harness Rodeo (no pun intended) and Nathan's Dad, OPEC could charge whatever they wanted and we wouldn't care.

Rodeo · 10-04-2006, 02:16 PM

This one really got my attention for some reason ... it's just so sleazy and awful. It tells you why we should throw our elected officials out regularly.

They get so wrapped up in the power that eventually they sell ther souls to keep it.

Jim Richards · 10-04-2006, 02:16 PM

uhh, no. I'm not buying that, Hunter.

lendaddy · 10-04-2006, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rodeo
Answer the question this time. A "rollseyes" won't do.

I make up my own mind, I hvae no idea what they said or why. If they tell me Hastert knew more than he says he did and they are credible it will indeed change my mind.

Lots of politicin'going on here and the real truth will come out.

hunter914 · 10-04-2006, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jim Richards
uhh, no. I'm not buying that, Hunter.

you don't think Rick and Rodeo could fuel our energy needs?

red-beard · red-beard's Garage

The methane reserves in the crap of some here is nearly limitless.

Rodeo · 10-04-2006, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by lendaddy
I make up my own mind, I hvae no idea what they said or why. If they tell me Hastert knew more than he says he did and they are credible it will indeed change my mind.

Lots of politicin'going on here and the real truth will come out.

You're a good bad soldier daddy, I'll give you that much.

Corrupt politicians count on people like you.

Nathans_Dad · Nathans_Dad's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by hunter914
How far down the rabbit hole do you want to go?

Well, since a teenager was put at risk of molestation, I think this rabbit hole should be fully explored. Don't you?

Rodeo · 10-04-2006, 06:25 PM

We are no where near the end of this story. Let's listen to Rep. Reynolds' former chief of staff:

I've learned within the last few hours that unnamed sources have purported that I intervened on behalf of [Florida] Congressman [Mark] Foley to prevent a page board investigation. This is categorically false. At no point ever did I ask anyone to block any inquiries into Foley's actions or behavior. These sources know this allegation is false.

Having stepped down as Mr. Reynolds' chief of staff, I have no reason to state anything other than the facts. I have no congressman and no office to protect. I intend to fully cooperate with any and every investigation of Mr. Foley's conduct. At the same time, I will fully disclose to the FBI and the House Ethics Committee any and all meetings and phone calls I had with senior staffers in the House leadership about any of Foley's inappropriate activities.

The fact is, even prior to the existence of the Foley e-mail exchanges, I had more than one conversation with senior staff at the highest level of the House of Representatives asking them to intervene when I was informed of Mr. Foley's inappropriate behavior. One of these staffers is still employed by a senior House Republican leader. Rather than trying to shift the blame on me, those who are employed by these House leaders should acknowledge what they know about their action or inaction in response to the information they knew about Mr. Foley prior to 2005.

Why would they look into Foley's behavior with pages? After all, he gave a cool 1/2 million to the Repub House committee, and his seat was helping them retain power.

What's a few 16 year olds when your big office is in jeopardy, right?