Quote:
Originally Posted by midtnscott
The real issue is that the Republican House leadership knew most of this at least as far back as 2005 and did nothing in order to keep political power.
|
What will be telling is how the investigation will unfold. Or there will be a repeated stonewall. Or "we'll investigate ourselves". We see how well that worked out before. I hope Pelosi is successful in getting sworn testimony. Unfortunately, we also remember how well
that has worked before as well.
I wonder if the whole thing isn't orchestrated to draw attention away from the demise of habeas corpus. If in fact Hastert et al knew about Foley's activities at least a year before now (admitting only to six months), it certainly seems convenient to me for them to drop the ball now, just in front of elections. That's not a slip the RNC makes.
I believe that the sudden disclosure of Mr Foleys activities is because the RNC needs to do the
Scanlon shell-game thing to redirect attention from what they have just done to the most basic fabric of American law. Foley was was an ace in the hole when Congress needed a deflection.
I agree, though, Foley is on his own between himself and G'd. He made his deals. One cannot survive inside the Beltway without making a few deals. I think that one can also reach deep inside and have an honest look at their eternity before trading it off for what's turning out to be a rather expensive thrill. The best way to go about getting into trouble is not to go looking for it. Too often, regret is an wholly avoidable place to be in. Regret at being caught in nefarious activity seems to be a regular pattern for Congressionals.
The tentacles of this whole series of incidents go way beyond who is now on the who's-who list of Congressional sex scandals. Who's been covering up and delaying investigations into the ever-unfolding Abramoff scandal, are the same "whos" who will be dragging their feet into any substantive investigation into Hastert's prior knowledge.
They're all the same Whos in that particular Whoville.
OTOH, youthful innocence only lasts so long. It's a shame to have it taken away. Foley had no right to take (or attempt to take) a youngster's innocence. It's hard to keep the faith of a little child when it's so greatly tested so early in life. I think it's a far better thing to teach a child what a predator is, in an honest fashion, than for a child ever to have to use that knowledge for discernment. Or worse, to find out the hard way. Even if there was no predation, the pages know that there
could be. The fact that they could be thrown into adult intrigues is in and of itself disturbing.
I can only imagine how the parents of all the pages are feeling right now. How many adult situations, like political circuses, are those young pages expected to deal with? Neither they nor their parents bargained for any of this attention.
I wouldn't want that to happen to my young'un. I wouldn't want anything like that whole panoply of experiences to happen to me if I were sixteen.
But Foley knew up-front what he was in for. Or certainly he is old enough to know. He also had to know it was only a matter of time before the party threw him under the bus. That is a reality of the Log Closet existence.
It occurs to me that since Thursday night, I haven't heard a word on MSM about the President's self-forgiveness "we've been torturing all along, but now we're ripping the Constitution a new one so we can bring medieval law and 'justice' back home to you" legislation, yet much is being made of Foley's mess.
This has Rove's touch all over it.