Harper’s: Dem operative gave us Foley e-mails back in May
posted at 3:16 pm on October 10, 2006 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Gateway Pundit’s excited and thinks he and Red State might have identified who that operative is. The guy they’ve fingered left Rodney Alexander’s office in 2004, though. The e-mails that were provided to Harper’s — the creepy but not sexual “send me a picture of you” messages — weren’t written until 2005.
Anyway, as Ken Silverstein says:
If this was all a plot to hurt the G.O.P.’s chances in the midterm elections, why did the original source for the story begin approaching media outlets a full year ago? If either of the Florida papers had gone to press with the story last year, or if Harper’s had published this spring, as the source hoped, the Foley scandal would have died down long ago. A stronger case could be made that the media, including Harper’s, dropped the ball and inadvertently protected Foley and covered up evidence of the congressman’s misconduct.
The smoking gun here isn’t the creepy e-mails, it’s the overtly sexual “take off your pants” IMs. Who provided those to ABC, and more importantly, to CREW?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
AP, that loathesome creature O’Reilly had on last night, Mike Rogers I believe his name was. Wasn’t he behind much of this?
He was saying he’d be revealing more GOP names over the next month.
A very oily character, he is.
JammieWearingFool on October 10, 2006 at 3:25 PM
Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I think Mike Rogers, on his blog, was strongly suggesting that Dennis Hastert was gay. I can’t believe O’Reilly had him on. I don’t consider him to be a credible anything.
bopbottle on October 10, 2006 at 3:38 PM
I hope they do start their little “gay” witch hunt. I will undoubtedly hurt the Democrats much more than the Republicans.
McCarthyism???
stenwin77 on October 10, 2006 at 3:42 PM
To use a term coined by John Podhoretz – McCornthyism.
thirteen28 on October 10, 2006 at 4:31 PM
Do you really think they would out any Dems??? Rather naive of you, don’t you think?
It sound like it was the MSM itself who set this up deliberately as an October surprise. Full blown desctruction of even the sham of impartiality.
Mike O on October 10, 2006 at 4:49 PM
McCornthyism indeed, but also a callous indifference to those pages who have had to deal with the Foleys, Studds, and other page turners within Congress. If any underage (below 16 in DC) page was harassed or worse while the MSM sat on the story, would that not make them accessory to the acts?
chsw
chsw on October 10, 2006 at 4:56 PM
this is starting to get worse and worse for the Dems
If someone can find this information even a week before the midterms then the GOP can take the hammer used by the Dems are return the favor. But that’s a big if even if things are starting to point more towards that.
Still even if we do find who did this and about the timing, there must be a strong attempt to seperate foley’s crimes (horrendous as they are) from the democrats silence on the matter.
Defector01 on October 10, 2006 at 5:00 PM
McCarthyism? To me it looks like ’someone’ is exploiting homophobia, and I continue to believe that will backfire on liberals as they keep pushing the issue. It is not a good time to be a homosexual, and that cannot be blamed on the republicans. Not at all.
I believe that a list of homosexual liberals working in Congress will soon appear. I’ll cite an unnamed source for my preponderance, and my hint as to the identity of that source is he is the same one who let it leak that Rove was about to be indicted.
DannoJyd on October 10, 2006 at 5:15 PM
You can spin this howver you want, but it will never change the fact that a “conservative” Republican tried to do teenage boys. It also won’t change the fact that Democrats are going to take over in November. And when we do, we are going to destroy this country as fast as we can, just to piss the Republicans off. I CAN’T WAIT!!!
shackler on October 10, 2006 at 5:23 PM
Can’t wait to destroy the country. You’ll go far.
JammieWearingFool on October 10, 2006 at 5:41 PM
Shackler, if your beloved Godless liberals happen to screw up [again], and lose in November, what then? Emmigrate to Canada? Mexico? Pluto?
If they happen to win, what then? They have to get White House approval since there is no chance they can override a Bush veto. Impeach Bush? OK, then you are stuck with Cheney. What then?
Caution! I think I hear Rove approaching. :oP~~~
DannoJyd on October 10, 2006 at 6:17 PM
That gets you reelected in Massachusetts.
No wait, you have to be a Democrat. My bad.
Pablo on October 10, 2006 at 6:41 PM
That is the most poorly written article, not to mention a desperate attempt to cover the rears of the left that is involved. He says the reps are lying but in the next breath says he was presented the info by dems? HUH? Still don’t think Mark Rogers had anything to do with it?
Pam on October 10, 2006 at 8:04 PM
No Pablo, it isn’t what you “try to do to teenage boys” that gets you re-elected in Massachusetts (not to mention the fact that Pelosi nominates you to head committees) but what you ACTUALLY do to teenage boys that gets you re-elected.
Let’s be specific here….;-)
Rightwingsparkle on October 10, 2006 at 8:10 PM
In an article trying to smear the Republicans, Harpers is admitting it got the info from Democrats (and who cares if it was 5 months ago, it would still do damage) And it seems to be admitting that it was the media who sat on the story to affect the election for the Democrats.
Did they not learn anything from the Dan Rather disaster?
Shameful.
Rightwingsparkle on October 10, 2006 at 8:14 PM
I’m stretching for a silver lining if the demagogues win both houses, but if it gets Bush to veto a BUDGET BILL it “might” be worth it…maybe…just maybe?
SouthernGent on October 10, 2006 at 9:36 PM
Don’t think for a moment that Rahm Emanuel’s fingerprints aren’t on this entire thing. I have no doubt that he is behind the timing, that he is giving the marching orders, that he is overseeing the entire sleeze run, and that he has more to drop before the election.
Rahm Emanuel was THE Clinton war room hitman. He was the one who orchistrated the media attack on Linda Tripp and Kathleen Willey and who neutralized Juanita Brodrick after she broke her silence.
This entire affair REEKS of Emanual’s touch.
georgej on October 11, 2006 at 5:27 AM
My vote for fingerprints-all-over-the-knife goes to tim mahoney, his name is on the ballot.
tormod on October 11, 2006 at 8:23 AM
The Democrats in Florida are resorting to gutter politics by trying to pull Charlie Crist into the Foley scandal.
The electorate is too smart for this ploy. This scheme will backfire on the Dems. Charlie is a good conservative and will be a worthy replacement for JEB Bush.
George on October 11, 2006 at 10:48 AM
Comment pages: