I-Messages Obtained by ABC News Cast Doubt on Claims from Foley's Lawyer

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/10/instant_message.html

<snip>

Foley, who checked into an alcohol rehabilitation facility in Florida, also "reiterates unequivocally that he has never had sexual contact with a minor," Roth said.

But instant messages obtained by ABC News do reveal that Congressman Foley met with an underage page in San Diego, a meeting which they spoke about in an instant message exchange from April, 2003.

<snip>

He denied, however, that Foley ever offered to provide alcohol for teens at his Capitol Hill apartment.

But according to an instant message provided to ABC News by a former page, Foley did make such an offer to a former page in April, 2003.

---

Hmmmm.

I'm shocked! :sarcasm:

Or is the lawyer a lying sack o' pasture pastry?

It's easier to hide in muddied waters.

Covering for his piece of shit client. I'm sure he is getting paid very well.

:rofl:

Lawyers routinely bend the truth.

" .... I did not have sexual relations with that boy ... the page ...."


Payback's gonna be a BIOTCH, you evil Repukelicans !!!! :bounce:

worth a whole lot then, is it?

defense - that is both seem to be complete lies

Notice - his lawyer said that he didn't have sexual contact with a minor - But he didn't say a "teenager or a page" (he's getting into the legal definition of "minor" and if the page was 17 and a minor is being defined as 16 or younger....

I think they are doing damage control and trying their darndest to deflect all the storm coming at them...

Not going to work....

Foley is going to be arrested.

...I thought IMs didn't stay around very long.

Is AOL giving up IM messages "on demand" now too!?!

and frankly those boys were probably encouraged to save them due to the harassing nature of them.

AND altered afterward, so Foley's lawyers can claim that as well.

How do we know for sure these guys were underage? And isn't 17 the age of consent in many states?

The more we talk about this, the less time we spend talking about Bush's war crimes and assaults on the Constitution and Treasury.

First off, who enforces the law? Foley supposedly sexually solicited young men over the Internet. In what state did the crime happen? If say, it was in Florida, where Foley resides, consent is 18. If the charges come out of the state of Loiusiana, where one page lives, consent is 17. If the charges are brought out of DC, consent is 16. There are also the parental permission riders that often appear with consent legislation - meaning parents must consent as well.

As for your quip about AOL im histories being altered after the fact, we are not positive that the IM software Foley used was indeed AIM. It could have been Yahoo or MSN - programs that automatically collect a history file. The way to prove authenticity with those programs would be to open the application and click the particular history of the particular contact/IM Buddy.

As for AOL chat history, apparently AIM doesn't do history logging. Therefore, the most common method to save AIM chats would be to copy/paste into a text editor or word processing software and save. Those type files can be altered after the fact, however, the original dates of their creation - not so easy to spoof. As well, there are many software programs - easily available over the web - that can save AIM history files automatically. In theory, one could prove the authenticity of the IMs by opening such a program and displaying a saved history log from a particular contact/IM Buddy. Another way to prove authenticity would be to save screen captures of the actual AIM chat windows.

What gets lost in this (coming) RW debunking of the IMs is that, more than one page saved these IMs for three years. Obviously they thought the messages from Foley were signifigant enough to protect for prosperity: Saved through hard drive crashes and formats. Saved through file corruptions, viruses and spyware installs.

ON EDIT: I see they wingnuts are debunking the emails. Cute. I bet someone has a master copy.

Anybody got any info on the stopsexpredators site? I have seen the blog but being a blogspot page, there's no way to do a WHOIS lookup.

It's five weeks to an Election Day that could give Democrats in Congress subpoena power and control of investigative Committees. For the last six years, the mainstrean media haven't provided much coverage for the Iraq fiasco, the Republican assault on the Constitution, $200 million a month in corporate bribery of Congress, etc. Democrats don't have microphones big enough to reach mmillions of voters, and therefore must rely on mainstream media coverage of our issues.

Is it reasonable to believe Kouric, Gibson, or Williams will turn into Keith Olbermanns on the serious policy issues over the next month, because of anything we might do on the serious policy issues of 9-11 hysteria?

On the other hand, mistakes Tony Snow, Denny Hastert, and Dubya himself already have made on the Predatorgate Coverup offer the possibility that THIS scandal story will last longer than a week. Once a media feeding frenzy has started over Predatorgate, then it may be possible to extend the national debate to other forms of corruption of Congress, to the folly of trusting the professed "family values" of Republicans, and to all the other major issues in getting our country back.

In this context, don't you think Predatorgate Coverup is worth spending a few days on? IMO, we may need to reframe all our other issues in Predatorgate Coverup terms if we want them covered before Election Day.

IMO, if the Predatorgate Coverup still is at the top of talk show agendas on Sunday, then the coverup story likely has "legs" until Election Day. Next week, it may be possible to start expanding the national debate to other issues.

Wrong. Look what happened to Clinton, who finally got some guts and told that neocon interviewer off.

If Hillary, Kerry, Dean, Kennedy had any balls and spoke the truth, like BUSH IS A WAR CRIMINAL, A LIAR AND AN ELECTION THIEF, they would get all microphones turned to them, believe you me. And voters would listen.

working for fondling foley.

I just think they are trying to build a case for alcoholism over pedophilia.

What is sexual harrasment in the workplace? Is that now legal?
Isn't Foley considered management and the page considered to be a worker?

Is is illegal to offer liquor to minors?

Did the Repug congress quietly slip in legislation to make these things retroactively legal? Or will that be on the agenda in Jan.?