Check this out. There seems to be no question that he’s guilty — if he wasn’t, one assumes, he’d be fighting this tooth and nail instead of checking himself into rehab — but I’m at a loss to explain the discrepancies in the messages. I can think of two possibilities:

1. They aren’t the same e-mail messages. They were sent to two different kids, probably on the same day, as a sort of friendly form letter. In that case, though, wouldn’t he have copy/pasted them instead of retyping them? I.e., wouldn’t they be exactly the same, down to the letter?

2. SSP.com or CREW (or both) never obtained an actual printout of the e-mails but rather had the text read to them over the phone by their source. Which they then formatted to look like e-mails. But why do that? Why not just present the text in proper English and note that the source had read it to them over the phone?

You’ll note that the subject line of the CREW version is “e-mail 2,” which is … unlikely.

Mind you, these aren’t the only discrepancies between Foley e-mails. When writing this post, I noticed that ABC News and the Times quoted the same line from the same Foley e-mail slightly differently. The Times had it as “send me a pic of you as well,” ABC had it as “send me an email pic of you as well.” I didn’t mention it in my post because I figured it was just an error in transcription. Now I don’t.

So why are there two very similar, yet slightly different, versions of Foley’s e-mails circulating? Theories?

Elsewhere, Tom Maguire notes a contradiction between ABC’s latest and the Times’s latest. ABC says a former page, Matthew Loraditch, claims to have been “warned” by Republican page supervisors not to get too chummy with Foley. But according to the Times’s latest, “Mr. Loraditch said he was never warned by program supervisors to stay away from him.”

The Times adds, however, that Loraditch once heard a supervisor say Foley was “odd.” Which suggests that at least someone had some inkling of what was going on.

Anyway. How ’bout that rehab, huh? First booze turned Mel Gibson into an anti-semite, now it’s gone and turned Mark Foley into a child predator. Alcohol: is there anything it can’t do?

Update: Dean Barnett e-mails to say that perhaps the supervisor who called Foley “odd” simply thought he was gay, not a pedophile.