Should Hastert Resign from Public Service too since he was covering for Foley?
2006-12-08 07:12:16 · 9 answers · asked by elisioloyd 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
"a pattern of conduct among many "to remain willfully ignorant of the potential consequences" of Foley's conduct.
The report found that Hastert was likely told about Foley's e-mails by two Republican leaders last spring.
Hastert has said he doesn't recall the conversations. But both Majority Leader John Boehner of Ohio and Rep. Tom Reynolds of New York have said they informed the speaker last spring.
"The speaker's reported statement in response to Majority Leader Boehner that the matter 'has been taken care of' is some evidence that the speaker was aware of some concern regarding Rep. Foley's conduct" even prior to the spring conversation, the report said.
2006-12-08 08:40:23 · update #1
I bet the next Republican candidate for President will campaign on the platform that he is the least sinister and dishonest Republican around...
2006-12-08 07:15:00 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
there is an inquest. Hastert will probably conflict through some outcomes even as that is performed. each and every time there is any type of wrongdoing the manager is frequently held responsible. it is in inner most existence besides as in authorities. although they don't renounce, even Bishops were held responsible in Civil suits (even though it has ultimately been the congregations which have ended up paying damages). Republicans discovered that they did not might want to be responsible even as Reagan were given away with affirming that his subordinates pulled off Iran Contra without him understanding about it. This tact does not continuously artwork as interior the Enron case. that is largely admitting incompetence. so a techniques as Clinton is in contact that replaced right into a consensual affair with an adult. The sex or attractiveness of the different human being have not some thing to do with it. What Clinton bashers continuously ignore is that Clinton finally regarded what he did and apologized. If human beings opt for to carry onto their resentments after someone asks for forgiveness they're in elementary words hurting themselves. those fundamentalist Christianists might want to study the tale of David interior the Bible. The Republicans are blaming Democrats because this is what they continuously do. they say Demos knew about it and timed the launch for political benefit. likely the Republicans knew about it previously the Democrats. after all Foley's more advantageous effective and the properly of the web page software is the guy who must be held responsible. In both situations that must be Hastert. should you declare Foley replaced into chance free, if he's chance free why did he renounce?
2016-11-30 08:00:49 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Attached is the House Ethic Committee Report.
In it, they conclude that no further investigations or proceedings should be done, and that includes pursuing charges against Hastert. At the same time (and without naming names), the report goes on to criticize many people for not doing more to protect the pages or to stop Foley's predatory activities. However, the report goes on to say that no one explicitly broke the House rules, which is a weasely way to say "Lots of people did things really, really wrong, but we're not going to punish anyone."
It's another example of politicians giving each other a slap on the wrist for things that most of us non-politicians would spend time in jail for. And if any of the involved people had an ounce of humility, they too would resign out of shame for their lack of action & their failure to protect children in their custody. But humilty is an exceedingly rare commodity in the U.S. Congress.
2006-12-08 07:47:27 · answer #3 · answered by Dave of the Hill People 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes he should if he was found to be lying. These are the same guys that called for Clinton's impeachment just because he lied about having an affair with an intern.
2006-12-08 07:14:28 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Yes. If he knew and didn't do anything he is just as wrong as Foley was.
2006-12-08 07:15:28 · answer #5 · answered by Mikira 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think so, and anyone and everyone who knew of this and did nothing to correct the situation
2006-12-08 07:13:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
no it didnt; it said no republican did anything against the rules. get your stories straight. I know thats hard.
2006-12-08 07:14:58 · answer #7 · answered by CaptainObvious 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
that is most certainly NOT what the House Ethics committee found, sir! you lie thru your teeth!
2006-12-08 07:14:41 · answer #8 · answered by kapute2 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
But he didn't break any "rules"...
2006-12-08 07:13:54 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋