In addition to expressing his support for Hastert, Boehner also wrote in his letter to the editor that the timing of the allegations against Foley was odd.

“We also need to know why these messages surfaced only last week, on the final day of legislative business before the November elections,” the House majority leader wrote.

“If this evidence was withheld for political purposes, one can only speculate as to how many additional children may have been endangered before this information was finally revealed,” he wrote.

These guys really are completely insane!

But not Malkin.

Oh, don’t get me wrong, I think she’s a wingnut of the highest order, and no stranger to ethical lapses herself, such as when she published the personal information of those 20-year old UCSC students. But she’s also the mother of two small-ish children. And, as such, she understood this one on a level that went beyond partisanship. If you haven’t already, read THIS. Here’s the money quote(s):

At this point, I think the GOP is making a mistake banging the drum so hard over the apparent far left/MSM orchestration of the story. However long the other side sat on the e-mails and IMs, the fact is that Mark Foley–and Mark Foley alone–is responsible for giving his enemies something to spring upon his campaign in the first place…..

There is a time and place for attacking the Dems and the MSM. Now is not that time. Parents need assurance that their kids are safe on Capitol Hill. If Beltway GOP elites can’t understand this, they are beyond hope.

And, if I may borrow a line from Ms. Malkin, there is a time and place for attacking (with plenty-’o’-justification) Ms. Malkin for her many sins. But this time, you can leave her off the list of usual suspects in the rogues gallery.

Just sayin’.

Headed out to work. You folx have a GOOD day.

and yes, all the news coverage of Foley is setting each and every one of us off.

I’m still waiting for Lieberman to go on the Senate floor and denounce the immorality of the enabling/covering-up House “leadership” the way he did with President Clinton.

Susan in Iowa @ 174

Dab from Ct, If you’re still around, is anyone from the press corpse asking Lieberman whether he wants to denounce Hastert & his Gang, and the DOJ thugs, just to balance his comments about Clinton?

LOL

Nope. He’s too busy going negative on Lamont and then blaming Lamont for being negative. He’s too busy vacuming in hundreds of thousands of dollars from Republicans and lobbyists to bite the hand that feeds him.

Again, I wish the national and CT Dems would wake up and smell the coffee. What does it take for them to see reality?

———————
TRex – I’m glad you feel safe enough to confide in us. We’ve got your back. It’s amazing how many people have had experiences similar to yours. You most certainly were not at fault. It’s the abuser’s MO to blame the victim.

The Foley mess is certainly representative of the dysfunctional way our country approaches such crimes against children or young adults. I thought this part of your post was particularly poignant:

“It is the Reich Wing Culture of Denial that is to blame here. It’s as I said last night, in an environment where secrecy and repression are the law, predators flourish and thrive, escaping detection because nobody wants to admit that there is a problem. The victims are too ashamed to talk about what happened to them. Parents hush it up rather than risk the embarrassment. And then the cycle repeats itself.”

good job…

Gotta keep a constant eye on the press. From today’s NY Times:

“Mr. Dinerstein said he and other Republicans intended to trumpet the story of Mel Reynolds, the former Democratic congressman from Chicago who was imprisoned for corruption and for having sex with an under-age campaign worker. Former President Bill Clinton pardoned Mr. Reynolds before he left office.”

Bill Clinton did not pardon Mel Reynolds…he commuted his sentence for bank fraud. See below. But the reporter never even considered that the assertion of a Bill Clinton pardon for a sex crime was pretty absurd on its face. She just repeated it without even looking it up.
=============================================

In August 1994, Reynolds was indicted for having sex with a 16-year-old campaign volunteer. Despite the charges, he continued his campaign and was re-elected in November 1994. Reynolds initially denied the charges, which he claimed were racially motivated. On August 22, 1995 he was convicted on 12 counts of sexual assault, obstruction of justice and solicitation of child pornography. He resigned his seat on October 1, 1995.

Reynolds was sentenced to five years in prison and expected to be released in 1998. However, in April 1997, he was convicted on 15 unrelated counts of bank fraud and lying to SEC investigators. These charges resulted in an additional sentence of 78 months in federal prison. Reynolds served all of his first sentence and served forty-two months in prison for the later charges. At that point, U.S. President Bill Clinton commuted the sentence for bank fraud. As a result, Reynolds was released from prison and served the remaining time in a half way house. [1][2]

I just sent a note to the NYTimes public editor about this. Thanks for pointing it out.