ABC Glictch Shows Idenity of Foley Accuser

From ABC News [emphasis added]: ABC News now has obtained 52 separate instant message exchanges, which former pages say were sent by Foley, using the screen name Maf54, to two different boys under the age of 18. This message was dated April 2003, at approximately 7 p.m., according to the message time stamp. But blogger William Kerr of Passionate America says that he has identified the former page, that he is 21 now, and that he was 18 at the time the instant messages were exchanged. Kerr says that he discovered a copy of the instant messages on ABC's website that did not have the former page's screen name redacted. Using the screen name, Kerr and fellow blogger Ms. Underestimated say they were able to identify Foley's correspondent as a 21 year old former page, who was apparently 18 at the time of the instant messages with Foley. That would make ABC's story of an "underage" page being stalked by a predator a story about two consenting adults exchanging instant messages. Did Brian Ross know this, or did he willfully lie in order to run with the story and "get" the Republicans five weeks before the elections?

WWW Link

Did Brian Ross know this, or did he willfully lie in order to run with the story and "get" the Republicans five weeks before the elections?

Oh surely that couldn't be the case! A reporter or news agency trying to influence an election? Say it ain't so.

The sad fact is you don't even NEED for him to be 18 in D.C. The age of consent in D.C. is 16 thanks to the efforts of the Dem government there. To me the whole discussion of whether he is 16 or 18 just gives the Dems a pass on the fact that they WANT 16 year olds to be engaged in this kind of behavior, or at least want to facilitate it by handing out condoms and promoting no-questions-asked abortions.

Looks like this could be another backfire for the democrats and their media allies. Facts don't seem to matter anymore in the media.

The credit goes to this blog here.

WWW Link

Once again the media lies and conservative bloggers call them out. I'm also reading a story how democrats knew about this 3 months ago and were waiting until closer to the election to break it. The democrats and the media are one, no doubt about it.

Another Rathergate. No, I dont think they will ever learn. Blogdom is going to expose their lies, even if their fellow journalist refuse to.

this is really desperate folks....
1) hastert has already been shown to have lied about his knowledge, and he probably won't be speaker this time next year, if not next week

2) boehner has flip-flopped twice so far

3) reynolds behavior has just been disgraceful, starting with using children as a "media shield" from tough questions.

4) it is the right, not the left who has been the most vocal in calling for hastert's resignation. republican and conservative house members are running away from hastert like hunters running from dick cheney out in the field

5) ya'll wanna pick on the media as if they are the problem here. fact is that it was republicans that seemingly had the most knowledge of what was going on. and according to ABC, their sources are all republican...not the "vast left wing conspiracy" ya'll are flaming

6) listening to the radical right parrot sean hannity about jerry studds, and not a peep about mark crane (the republican who was caught red handed and didn't resign either, and when running for re-election, was defeated by democrat paul simon) has been one hell of a laugh for everyone else.

7) now ya wanna start a "gate" over a "glitch." meanwhile, fox news, namely bill o'reilly has been identifying foley in the banners below him (when on camera) as "democrat" mark foley. yet not a PEEP on that one huh? pUHLEEEEEEAAAAAAAssse!!!!!!!!!!

ya'll seem to be the only ones not disgusted by foley's actions and have been DESPERATELY trying to scapegoat the democrats, the media and everyone who isn't responsible because you fear the radical right losing it's hold on power next month. beyond anything legal, foley's actions have been disgusting. for anyone to be hitting on kids young enough to be their GRANDCHILDREN turns most of our stomachs, yet you wanna play lil "blame games" with everyone except those most directly accountable for letting this go for 12 YEARS. and you know as well as everyone else, one does not hang around hunting for anything where there is no game. do you really think these pages were warned over the years about "unsavory emails?" when foley came to congress in 1994 emailing wasn't even that common and i believe instant messaging, if it was even around, was in it's infancy. they were warned that he was a predator, not an overly friendly emailer.

you guys are so beyond wrong on this one, you'd have to catch a bus to get back to wrong.

but don't listen to me,,,continue with this spiel...it is only making things worse for your precious power hold.

5) ya'll wanna pick on the media as if they are the problem here. fact is that it was republicans that seemingly had the most knowledge of what was going on. and according to ABC, their sources are all republican...not the "vast left wing conspiracy" ya'll are flaming 6) listening to the radical right parrot sean hannity about jerry studds, and not a peep about mark crane (the republican who was caught red handed and didn't resign either, and when running for re-election, was defeated by democrat paul simon) has been one hell of a laugh for everyone else.

Really? You think so? Well let me inform you on a little something. The "media" has known about this debacle for about a year, yet we've heard "nothing" from them! And as far as #6 goes can you say "Sandy Berger"?

The media is and has been the problem here. This entire story is completely politically motivated. The media knew about this story and started it's push just weeks before a major election. I'm not excusing Foley's behavior, but the motivation behind this is disturbing, and it's coming from the democrats.

Foley is a scumbag and I'm glad he resigned, but this is another case of selected outrage from the democrats and media. If you want to sit there and tell us that democrats are squeaky clean and are not hypocrites about this, then I am laughing completely.

ABC News identified this person as being "underage", and that simply wasn't the case. Is there anybody that doesn't believe this is politically motivated?

Really? You think so? Well let me inform you on a little something. The "media" has known about this debacle for about a year,

really? so what, if they did...they are not responsible here. and furthermore, i kinda hold my congressman to a lil higher standard than my local newspaper reporter. who did the media you are claiming get their story from? according to ABC, their sources were republican. and no one has shown that anyone sat on this story for the election. that's just hannity / limbaugh rants.

And as far as #6 goes can you say "Sandy Berger"?

red hering...nothing to do with this.

the one thing that has renewed my faith in some is that this scandal has seperated the bush loyalist neoconservatives from the REAL conservatives. the loyalists are desperately runnin around like rats trying to play the "blame game" with everyone except the people who were closest and the most responsible. instead of acknowledging that mark crane didn't resign at the same time as studds (and admitting this isn't some partisan issue) you invoke the name of sandy berger? have i ever endorsed his removing documents? do you forget i am not a democrat? for the record, berger was wrong and deserves any punishment handed out to him within the guidelines of our constitution / statutes. and what the hell does this have to do with anything? just red more red herrings from the portable punditry. quick, go listen to some more rush to get some more strawmen for your field.

The media is and has been the problem here. This entire story is completely politically motivated. The media knew about this story and started it's push just weeks before a major election. I'm not excusing Foley's behavior, but the motivation behind this is disturbing, and it's coming from the democrats.

you are dead wrong...ABC, who broke the story, says it's sources were from the GOP. foley's ex chief of staff tried to squash the story by bribing ABC with an exclusive. he has resigned and is revealing that the house leadership has been sitting on this for at least 3 years. and sorry, the media is not held to the same standard as people who are elected "LAWMAKERS."

THERE IS NOTHING HERE SOURCED TO THE DEMOCRATS. every credible sourcing has gone back to the GOP. the most outraged here and the ones leading the charge for hastert's resignation are real conservatives. this issue is clearly seperating the true conservatives that act out of principle from the power hungry neoconservative kool aid drinkers.

If you want to sit there and tell us that democrats are squeaky clean and are not hypocrites about this, then I am laughing completely.

This is totally irrelevant. you wanna talk selective cherry picking? let's talk about how many times the portable GOP pundits have invoked the name jerry studds, without mentioning mark crane. let's talk about how fox news has been getting away with putting "democrat" under pictures and video of mark foley. i can go on and on, but this is about protecting innocent teenagers from predators, not the political "blame game" you are manufacturing.

and that aside, who the hell cares what happened in the past? is that the standard? are we playing games and using some past red herring nonsense to actually excuse anyone from responsibility here? is protecting children a political "tit for tat" game to you as you are professing? isn't it time to put a stop to these predators instead of trying to figure out how to best attack your opponent with this story?

ABC News identified this person as being "underage", and that simply wasn't the case. Is there anybody that doesn't believe this is politically motivated?

every day, more and more pages are coming forward . 1 was 18, and i don't know about you, but i'm still disgusted. and the rest so far were 16 or less at the time. your statement is untrue. you try to make it like there is only 1 page involved, and they are 18. that is dead wrong puppy.

it's obvious who is politically motivated here...and it isn't the democrats.

you are dead wrong...ABC, who broke the story, says it's sources were from the GOP. foley's ex chief of staff tried to squash the story by bribing ABC with an exclusive. he has resigned and is revealing that the house leadership has been sitting on this for at least 3 years. and sorry, the media is not held to the same standard as people who are elected "LAWMAKERS."

CBS also told us that the Bush documents were real, but we know how that goes. The ABC reporter supposedly had this story a couple months ago but didn't go ahead with it. Maybe it was because it wasn't close enough to the next elections.

Also, Fordham the ex chief-of-staff has not been completely accurate in his stories. either, but that doesn't seem to make in the front page news of this story.

i can go on and on, but this is about protecting innocent teenagers from predators, not the political "blame game" you are manufacturing.

This is not about protecting teenagers, this whole story is about democrats trying to win an election. There are other threads out there that show the hypocrisy of the democrats on this issue.

isn't it time to put a stop to these predators instead of trying to figure out how to best attack your opponent with this story?

I agree. Will you tell that to Pelosi and the rest of her party?

every day, more and more pages are coming forward . 1 was 18, and i don't know about you, but i'm still disgusted. and the rest so far were 16 or less at the time. your statement is untrue. you try to make it like there is only 1 page involved, and they are 18. that is dead wrong puppy.

I haven't seen too many more pages coming forward, and I'm still looking for an accurate account of the other pages ages. However, this post was about ABC incorrectly labeling this story as someone underage, when it was simply not the case. I'm not dismissing anything else, just showing how once again the media distorts the facts. Usually only when it deals with republicans.

Puppy....lmao again.

it's obvious who is politically motivated here...and it isn't the democrats.

Right....

Keep telling yourself that every time you watch democrats on TV for the next two weeks.

I'm sorry, all this debate is confusing.

A Republican congressman sends disgusting IMs and emails to young pages.

A page tells a reporter, who notifies the Republican sponsor of this page immediately (in "late 2005")Link

The Republican congressman, Rodney Alexander, passes this information on to the Republican Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert's office, and then the Clerk of the House.

Also, the Republican "Page Committee Chairman John Shimkus (R-Ill.) claims that in late 2005, information was passed along to him by the clerk’s office regarding the email exchange. Shimkus advised Foley to immediately stop contacting the boy, and Foley agreed. Shimkus never informed Rep. Dale Kildee (D-Mich.), the lone Democrat on the Page Committee, about the situation." Link

When little action is taken by those Republicans, "In spring 2006, Alexander did notify [Republican] Rep. Tom Reynolds (R-N.Y.), chairman of the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee, regarding the matter."

Still nothing happens, and fed up pages again go to the media in search of vindication, in late 2006.

A notoriously conservative newspaper, The Washington Times calls for the resignation of Hastert. Link

Now, that's all pretty easy to follow. But how does it follow that this is the media's and the Democrats' fault?

/me wonders if maaaaybe SCs violent bias about this might be linked to some other bias he doesn't want to talk about. This is a sexual harassment case now, period. The "children" were all over the age of consent. If SC is this enflamed about it, maybe he has some issues that have no bearing on this particular incident.

keep talkin boys,,,keep throwin out those hannity inspired parrot lines...violent bias? right...3 more pages came forward again today...wait till some scouts come forward, or others...sexual harrassment case? what nonsense!

have a nice day:) keep attackin those messengers!

The fact that you would instantly believe anyone who came forward at this point shows just how badly you need for this to be a "scandal" instead of just business as usual in skanky DC circles. How naive do you have to be to believe that what Foley was doing isn't done every day there...

What do you keep brining up Hannity for?

Anybody who comes forward now must be looked at very carefully. Because now we are in the stage of book deals and "15 minutes of fame".

What do you keep brining up Hannity for?

because you are using his talking points

The media is not the problem it is the GOP leadership that DID NOTHING and kept the information from the Democrat on the Page Oversight committee. This is a 100% GOP issue. It is not a problem caused by the press nor the Democrats!

because you are using his talking points

Just as you are using the far left ones?

The media is not the problem it is the GOP leadership that DID NOTHING and kept the information from the Democrat on the Page Oversight committee. This is a 100% GOP issue. It is not a problem caused by the press nor the Democrats!

BS col! The "press" knew about this a year ago! Why did "they" not say anything?