Wouldn't it have been smarter for them to have forced him to resign then and had a special election then to get slammed now? Did they really think they had covered it up completely?
2006-10-02 12:06:41 · 9 answers · asked by Pseudo Obscure 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yes, it would have been smarter to do so.
However, it appears they were concerned with losing a seat in the House of Reps. They preferred to take the gamble of the info NOT coming out vs. definitely losing the seat. Sounds like their gamble didn't pay off.
More of this will come out - this is really bad and it will effect the Republicans poorly this election.
2006-10-02 12:09:42 · answer #1 · answered by knoxymama 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You need to go back to the news. The congressional leaders had his emails. They don't particularly say much, but they do seem a little weird. It was the recently released IM's that were explicit. Those, Congressional leaders didn't have.
So who intercepted the IM's, and how long did they have them? Is the release of them politically timed? Any crimes involved by those that gathered them?
2006-10-02 12:26:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They knew of the e-mails those were pretty benign and he had been reprimanded.They did not know about the IM's a year ago or they would have ousted him so they could get a different name on the ticket.As it stands their will be a replacement but Foley's name will be on the ballot.So the seat is likely yours but only through endangering juveniles.
2006-10-02 12:32:48 · answer #3 · answered by Tommy G. 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Republicans believe the American public to be idiots! And the
American public has given them full reason to think that. They believe that they can create spin for anything and we will buy it...why shouldn't they..we elected the worst president we have ever had TWICE! IT just goes on and on...no wonder the American people have become totally apathetic towards politics...there isn't an honest one in the pack.
2006-10-02 12:27:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
before everything, i comprehend i'm no longer a guy yet i'm gonna answer anyhow. It somewhat relies upon on the form of guy. yet yeah rather some adult males like harmless females, and a few like dumb females who pretend the have a ideas of a 5 year previous. yet maximum adult males are not frequently attracted to the form of lady who "pretends" to be dumb and harmless for an somewhat courting in view that i could understand that they could somewhat get bored to death in that form of lady in view that she acts like she does not comprehend something. And the adult males ur speaking approximately possibly basically supply her that form of interest while she's around becuz they comprehend they could somewhat use her and then unload her. Sooo yeah
2016-10-18 09:20:40 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Democrat Congressman Stubbs from Mass. was caught having sex with a 17 year old boy in 1983 and kept getting re-elected until he retired in 1996 He even lashed out at those who exposed him for invading his privacy and was backed up by his fellow democrats. Double standard did you say? yes you are right. Double standard
2006-10-02 12:11:43 · answer #6 · answered by wudbiser 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
How do we know there are not deviant DEMONCRATS in Washington D.C.? This problem is not limited to one "side of the aisle". The big questions are why were these instant messages held for three years, who had them and who leaked them to ABC news?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Congressional_page_sex_scandal
2006-10-02 12:17:56 · answer #7 · answered by Bawney 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A lot of newspapers knew about it for a long time too, but it didn't come out unitl last week. That seems political. The Republican leadership didn't know about it all until last week.
2006-10-02 12:13:35 · answer #8 · answered by J D 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Big paedo
2006-10-02 12:09:45 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋