There have been so many twists and turns in the Mark Foley scandal that we nearly forgot it all started with some emails from a lad in Louisiana. So, how important is said lad? Apparently not at all.
Testifying before the House Ethics Committee yesterday, Louisiana Representative Rodney Alexander insisted that while the boy received emails from Foley, he knew nothing of Foley’s other contacts. The New York Times reports:
Representative Rodney Alexander, Republican of Louisiana, said Wednesday that the page, who lives in his district, was not familiar with Mr. Foley’s pattern of conduct and should not be a focal point of the investigation.
“His parents have been almost physically sick about the attention that he’s gotten,” said Mr. Alexander, speaking to reporters after testifying for three hours before the House ethics committee. “We just look forward to the committee continuing their investigation, and hopefully this will come to a conclusion.”
The former page, who told a Congressional aide that Mr. Foley’s request for his photograph was “sick, sick, sick, sick,” has not been identified and has not spoken publicly about the case.
One has to admire this kid’s ability to keep mum. If we started a scandal that threatened to take down key members of the government, we’d be all over the television, radio, newspaper, and maybe even a billboard. But that’s just us.
Apparently, he just wants to put this whole Mark Foley thing behind him. We’re sure Mark Foley wants to be behind him, as well.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
In related news, after extensive interviews, the FBI still hasn’t found any evidence proving Foley broke federal sex crime laws. Never fear, though, prosecutors still have about two months to decide how to proceed. We have a feeling something will come up. How could it not? If we’ve gone through all of this and there’s not even a trial, it’ll be the biggest let down since…well…we don’t know. But it’ll be big!
(Yep, we’ve pasted the article for all you cheap bastards.)
October 19, 2006
Louisiana Page Not Central to Inquiry, Lawmaker Says
By JEFF ZELENY
WASHINGTON, Oct. 18 – The former Congressional page from Louisiana whose e-mail exchanges with Representative Mark Foley set off a Capitol Hill scandal was neither exposed to nor aware of the sexually explicit instant messages that ultimately led to Mr. Foley’s resignation, the lawmaker who sponsored the page said.
Representative Rodney Alexander, Republican of Louisiana, said Wednesday that the page, who lives in his district, was not familiar with Mr. Foley’s pattern of conduct and should not be a focal point of the investigation.
Mr. Alexander added that even though the former page had received only e-mail messages described as overly friendly, he still had been “exposed to a lot of trauma” since giving copies of his e-mail exchanges with Mr. Foley last year to Mr. Alexander’s office.
After news reports about the messages, other former pages came forward with information about instant-message exchanges with Mr. Foley.
“His parents have been almost physically sick about the attention that he’s gotten,” said Mr. Alexander, speaking to reporters after testifying for three hours before the House ethics committee. “We just look forward to the committee continuing their investigation, and hopefully this will come to a conclusion.”
The former page, who told a Congressional aide that Mr. Foley’s request for his photograph was “sick, sick, sick, sick,” has not been identified and has not spoken publicly about the case. Neither he nor other pages have appeared before the committee, which is investigating whether the House Republican leadership properly handled concerns over Mr. Foley’s behavior.
As Mr. Alexander left the closed-door session of the ethics committee on Wednesday, he declined to reveal details of his testimony, the same position taken by other witnesses. He said the questions in the case would be resolved only through interviews with other lawmakers.
“We told them what we know, when we knew it, and what we did about it,” Mr. Alexander said. “There are many people who know what we know, and have known it for a lot longer period of time than we’ve known.”
The committee also spent more than three hours questioning Elizabeth Nicolson, who was the chief of staff to Mr. Foley when he resigned on Sept. 29. Ms. Nicolson declined to comment as she left the hearing room early Wednesday evening.
The committee also intends to examine the conduct of Representative Jim Kolbe of Arizona, the only openly gay Republican in Congress, after a request from members of the Congressional page board to include Mr. Kolbe in the inquiry because of complaints the board had received.
A spokeswoman for Mr. Kolbe, Korenna Cline, said Wednesday that her office had not been contacted by the ethics committee, but that Mr. Kolbe would cooperate with any requests for information.
On Thursday, the House ethics committee is scheduled to hear from the majority leader, John A. Boehner, Republican of Ohio, and the former clerk of the House, Jeff Trandahl. Investigators say they believe Mr. Trandahl can help answer questions about how long Speaker J. Dennis Hastert’s office knew about Mr. Foley’s conduct.
Meanwhile, law enforcement officials said that Federal Bureau of Investigation interviews with a number of former pages had found no evidence that Mr. Foley violated federal sex crime statutes. Federal law generally requires proof that an adult engaged in an overtly sexual solicitation of someone under the age of consent, which varies by state.
Nevertheless, the officials said, there is no sign that the Justice Department’s preliminary inquiry is close to an end. Prosecutors have 90 days to conduct such investigations before deciding whether to go forward or shut the inquiry down.
David Johnston contributed reporting.
Tod Davidson
The age of consent in Washington D.C. is 16. That means that Foley can have sex with the all the pages (male or female) he wants without breaking the law. The only law they could prosecute him on is solliciting sex with a minor ON THE INTERNET. It’s OK to have sex with minors in many US states, but it’s not OK to ask for it on the internet. Since these laws are contradictory, any conviction would be overturned by higher courts. At any rate, although Foley’s emails were obscene, it would be almost impossible to prove he was solliciting sex. Conclusion: No charges will ever be filed, because the man did nothing wrong.