Ethics committee weighs in on Foley scandal.
By on Dec 8th, 2006 at 2:33 pm
Ethics committee weighs in on Foley scandal.
“The House ethics committee has concluded that Republican leaders did not break any rules in handling ex-Rep. Mark Foley’s improper advances to former male pages but were negligent in protecting the teenagers, a congressional aide said Friday.”
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
So they were guilty but not guilty-guilty. How Republican.
December 8th, 2006 at 2:40 pmWell that’s because in the last Congress they had no rules.
December 8th, 2006 at 2:40 pmAfter waiting to watch this on CNN (YUCK) which carried it “live” only to have them interrupt the conference mid way through. Typical corporate media behavior.
Thoughts concerning the Scandal. Also typical behavior of the “house” to protect their own over the protection of the children.
Oh well, as the “good” Doc said “Hind sight is 2020….
http://comlogic.blogspot.com/
December 8th, 2006 at 2:43 pmCoverup! Coverup! Coverup! The rat bastards are immoral SOBs and we, the American people, aren’t going to get the truth! Shame on us! Shame on the Republican party! Shame on the Democratic party! Shame on America and our pretense of having “moral” values!
December 8th, 2006 at 2:48 pmJust another cover-up before they all walk out of leadership of Congress. You know Hastert was pretty concerned about it, otherwise, why would he be hiding behind closed doors. Cover-up is the name of the game with Republicans because they GOT CAUGHT, AGAIN!!!!!
December 8th, 2006 at 2:48 pmGood report on the Foley matter. One would think that the GOP with religious values/morals would think that preying on children, molesting kids or turning a blind eye to criminal activity was a crime. Now we Americans and the world see that in the United States of American it’s legal to prey on children and ok to watch it happen. One would only wonder if a Democratic did this would the rules be different but Bill Clinton had an affair the GOP wanted him impeached for sinful acts. Molesting kids is legal as far as the GOP is concerned. Ralph Reed wasn’t telling a lie when he said the American people will follow blindly just use God’s name. What a proud moment for our country and it’s values. I wonder as other countries abuse kids will they listen to the United States leaders hypocrisy. To think if Jack, Grover and Ralph’s plan to have all Republicans in offices and the Presidency who would protect the children.
December 8th, 2006 at 2:48 pmYes, Clinton had/has a “rocket in his pocket” problem. But, the Republican leadership of the House conspired to cover-up for Foley and his “problem” and, even insisted that he run for re-election (even as they were bashing Gays in the election campaign). I think that’s call hypocrisy.
December 8th, 2006 at 2:48 pm#3 Blinded,
Your screen name is appropriate. Here’s some clarity for you:
Dems on Pedophiles and Sexual Predators: “Prosecute them, identify enablers and address the issue so as to protect our children.”
Dems on adulterers and Freedom of Speech: “We, as individuals may not condone the actions of consenting adults or agree with the message being put forth by certain groups, but as a nation we will protect the rights of all individuals including those that pertain to freedom of association and freedom of speech.”
I hope that helped to remove some of the wool over your eyes.
December 8th, 2006 at 2:53 pmDid I miss something? I know that Foley is a scumbag and has no business in decent society, but is there any evidance that he molested anyone? I though he was just “thinking” about it. You can not charge someone for their thoughts.
December 8th, 2006 at 2:54 pmFrom AmericaBlog:
House Ethics Report: Staff and Members actions in Foley scandal posed “a present danger to House pages” – therefore, no one should be disciplined.
http://americablog.blogspot.com/
December 8th, 2006 at 2:55 pmrobert,
How are we supposed to find out if he molested any children if they won’t investigate it?
December 8th, 2006 at 2:57 pmMove along, nothing to see here.
Any way that the Dems can restart the investigation once they are in power?
December 8th, 2006 at 2:57 pm9…it was the internet predator laws that he violated.
This ethics committee finding is ridiculous. The GOP failed to protect children but didn’t break any rules? So they have no rules protecting children? WTF???
December 8th, 2006 at 2:59 pmStalking on the internet is a crime I believe.
Crime or no crime, it is amazing to me that the House Leadership let this go on when they knew it was happening. That more of the leadership was not defeated is surprising to me and shows how Americans have been desensitized to these types of scandals.
Wasn’t Mark Foley Chair of the Committee that had oversight for internet crime?
December 8th, 2006 at 3:00 pm#9 robert,
It is called being a “Sexual Predator”, and yes, it is a problem and is illegal. Someone “thinking” about fishing illegally is not breaking the law. However, when that same someone proceeds to drop a line in the water they are breaking the law. Your claim that they would have to catch a fish first is way off the mark.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:02 pmThe message: It’s okay to be unethical as long as you don’t break the law. No consequences.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:03 pmJohnny, that would be one large piece of Illinois arse to you…..I don’t even want to think about it.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:06 pmThe upcoming congressional ethics committee, will have its hands full examining the ethics of the one it replaces.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:07 pmYawn.
Who cares? This story has lost its mojo.
Next topic please.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:09 pmI may be wrong, but talking to a minor, about sexually explicit matters, over the internet, the way Foley went about it is against the law. If it isn’t, it was sure as hell ethical and immoral. You don’t talk young boys about your erections, or how many times you masturbate, or ask them if they are wearing boxers.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:10 pmIt has only lost its mojo for republican apologists.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:10 pmRepublicans are the fear and smear party,
If there is any proof that internet predator laws were broken (which I believe there is) than this is not an issue for a Political Ethics(oxymoron, anyone) Committee should be looking at. We have these guys, with badges and guns that need to be taking care of this.
Personally, I would enact a “Fathers Right” to protect my child. But I am a caveman.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:10 pmSex, especially Gay sex, never loses its Mojo.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:11 pmTuber, I’m not as dumb as I look. Just trying to stir conversation and not make it totally a partisan issue. A scumbag by any color is still a scumbag.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:13 pmFace it Spudge, a story about questionable ethics in Congress is kind of like a story about the sun coming up. Happens everyday on both sides of the aisle.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:15 pmNo that doesn’t make you a caveman. It makes you a father. If I found out that somebody was preying on either of my daughters, I would cut his balls off, cook them in front of him, then force him to eat them.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:16 pmMove along, nothing to see here.
Any way that the Dems can restart the investigation once they are in power?
Comment by AshenShard — December 8, 2006 @ 2:57 pm
December 8th, 2006 at 3:17 pmLet’s hope so. Drive every one of these perverted queers from society.
Heh. Must resist come back.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:17 pmGreat…. so not protecting teenagers when they’re under your care is Ethical, eh?
December 8th, 2006 at 3:18 pmIs this what we can expect from the new bipartisanship? It is clear to the blind man that the timelines to not jive with the statements of the Repugs at the heart of this matter that a cover-up was made by more than one individual and the Dems don’t see a problem with this.
The bottom line, however, is that Foley was the joker who brought the house of cards tumbling down and helped elect a Dem congress.
Small consolation to those of us who want an accounting of this and see the remaining Repugs wallowing in the mire.
I, for one, am puzzled.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:20 pmWhy would anyone expect accountability from this Congress? The last act from the do-nothing 109th will be another whitewash. Is anyone surprised?
December 8th, 2006 at 3:25 pmDoes this negate the FBI Investigation?
What a shock: The outgoing party won’t fess up to anything under their watch.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:27 pmIsn’t negligence an actionable offense in a court of law???
December 8th, 2006 at 3:28 pmThe party of responsibility in action.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:35 pmyou creeps are really ones to talk ethics.
look at the posters here and what your party represents?
ethics.
humphh
December 8th, 2006 at 3:49 pm#25 robert,
Never said that you were “dumb”, I just pointed out how you were incorrect.
As for your “stirring” the conversation by trying to make this a non-partisan issue, I believe you are being a bit deceitful. I believe that most everyone on both sides of the isle believe that being a sexual predator is wrong and should be illegal.
However, one of the primary issues to this story is how the republicans placed party loyalty and political agendas above the good of the people, in this case CHILDREN. That is the elephant in the room that you are trying to tell me is just a unique piece of furniture. The fact that you are not ashamed of these people and demanding factual answers does not reflect well upon you.
December 8th, 2006 at 3:53 pmExcuse me? Just what word were you going for here?
December 8th, 2006 at 3:56 pm#38,
Do you have facts or evidence from which to make such nasty claims? Or are you one of those that don’t believe in any facts or reality that is not sanctioned by your preacher? You know, that guy who just got exposed doing meth and engaging in man-on-man love while preaching to his “flock”, about how evil drugs and gays are?
Can you say “projector”?
December 8th, 2006 at 4:02 pmWho is on this “Ethics” Committee? Anyone know?
December 8th, 2006 at 4:06 pmDoes this mean we’ll start seeing Dennis Hastert again….? :P
December 8th, 2006 at 4:07 pmSo let me see if I understand. They followed the rules required of them but did nothing to protect the paiges? If they did nothing to protect minors, left in their charge, from the sexual advances of one of their own…then how is that NOT wrong doing.
THe only POSSIBLE way that anyone could say they followed the rules is if the only rule they need to follow is to report the problem to someone.
If anything, this PROVES that the party AND Hastert knew what was going on and did nothing. So how is this not totally unethical? THey did nothing to protect minors from sexual predators. That is unethical…PERIOD.
December 8th, 2006 at 4:11 pmWhat a failure!
This just shows how negligent the Ethics Committee is at policing the House and highlights the need for an independent ethics agency.
December 8th, 2006 at 4:15 pmThat’s just like a republican. Because the written rule (or lack thereof) wasn’t broken, no crime was committed.
Similarly, because India never signed on to the non-prolif treaty, it never broke any of the rules so it’s ok for us to share our civilian nuke technology. I see a behavior patter here.
December 8th, 2006 at 4:20 pm#46 – Thanks j, I just found your link on the other thread.
Effing wankers.
December 8th, 2006 at 4:23 pmI am NOT surprised the so-called House Ethics Committee whitewashed the Mark Foley scandal! Just proves that GOPers are sexual perverts who cover up each other’s crimes! As for the dumb Democrats who took part in this charade > wake the hell up!
December 8th, 2006 at 4:38 pmMore GOP double-speak. The 110th Congress won’t come soon enough.
December 8th, 2006 at 4:38 pmNo rules were broken, so everything is okay. True to form for the Republicans and their collective aversion to personal responsibility. What I don’t get is how anyone who cares at all about personal responsibility can continue to support the GOP. How about the family values crowd? Don’t they think personal responsibility is important? Or are they just flaming hypocrites?
December 8th, 2006 at 4:48 pmSo they covered up for the coverup, figures.
Republican “Values” on display for all to see folks.
Sick disgusting @#$%$ pukes
December 8th, 2006 at 4:52 pmOr are they just flaming hypocrites?
Comment by VerbalKint
Yes.
December 8th, 2006 at 4:52 pmHas anyone heard a peep about this from the same people who were criticizing Mary Cheney?
December 8th, 2006 at 4:53 pmI have figured out the bizarre post #38. It is an attempt at haiku. The writer got the form slightly wrong, however, which traditionally has 3 lines of 5, 7, and 5 syllables, respectively. I have corrected the poem in a way that I think retains approximately the same meaning:
you creeps talk ethics
what your party represents
party ethics. humphh
Comment by angelina from Ga. — December 8, 2006 @ 3:49 pm
December 8th, 2006 at 5:04 pmSo let me get this straight. The Republican leaders accept the responsibility, but not the blame.
How positively Nixonian of them.
December 8th, 2006 at 5:21 pmyou creeps are really ones to talk ethics.
look at the posters here and what your party represents?
ethics.
humphh
Comment by angelina from Ga
Way to add to the debate.
December 8th, 2006 at 5:31 pmYou contribute nothing because you know nothing.
Care to tell me what ethical boundaries I have crossed?
Troll.
What ethics committee. You mean the non-ethical ethics committee.
December 8th, 2006 at 7:01 pmRules? Ethics? We don’t need no stinkin’ rules, cuz we’re Republicans… Ah, the fascist gift that keeps on giving. I still find it extremely hard to believe that any Republican candidate received any votes at all in the November election… Maybe they received bogus votes from the electonic election hacking, rigging and stealing branch of the GOP. Who knows?
December 8th, 2006 at 7:06 pmCheers.
Tuber,
Nope, that is an elephant, big and white. I have to take the position of “IF” because I am not privy to all of the information. Personally, I think the guy is disgusting from what I have read and heard. But I am sure that the “Ethics Committee” is not ALL Repubs.
Also, there will be legal things coming his way soon. Again, we are not privy to all the information and until proven otherwise, he has the presumption of innocence.
December 8th, 2006 at 7:43 pmWhy are the Dems participating in this farce?To see the Dem comgresswoman from Cleveland,OH in the background supporting this BS made me sick.
December 9th, 2006 at 12:28 amIf you recall, the Democrat on the ethics committee was not even told about any of the “conversations” Republican Staff was having with Republican Leadership about Mr. Foley.
December 9th, 2006 at 8:45 am[...] ThinkProgress.org [...]
December 12th, 2006 at 4:15 pm