Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe NYC who wrote (305393)	10/5/2006 12:20:37 AM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575421

"The thing is that there was apparently no smoking gun." Umm, ok. Fordham thought it was important enough to contact Hastert's office. Why not address that issue?

To: Joe NYC who wrote (305393)	10/5/2006 4:13:16 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575421

So what did they (the house leadership) have to go on? Foley being strange overly friendly? A lot of people are strange and overly friendly. Contacting former pages? It is not House jurisdiction. So you think that its perfectly normal for a congressman to ask a page if he wears boxer shorts and to ask the page to send over a picture of himself? And apparently there are more explicit ones that have not been released. So tell me what you think about these comments: "In one, he discusses with a boy whose mother was hovering nearby masturbation techniques while also asking the boy to measure his erect penis. Mr Foley used the screen name Maf54, as in the following exchange with a school boy: Maf54: You in your boxers, too? Teen: Nope, just got home. I had a college interview that went late. Maf54: Well, strip down and get relaxed. Another message: Maf54: What ya wearing? Teen: T-shirt and shorts. Maf54: Love to slip them off of you. The Washington Post reported yesterday that House Speaker Dennis Hastert was notified early this year of inappropriate emails from Mr Foley to a 16-year-old page. While those emails were not sexually explicit, in one, Mr Foley asked the teenager to send a picture of himself. The boy told associates the request was "sick"." Does this all sound good to you? BTW, given your comments, you must not be familiar with the legislation Foley helped get through Congress. Its against the law to solicit sex over the internet from someone under the age of 18 whether they are a page or not. Ironically, Foley may be subjected to this law once he gets out of rehab. So, joe, is this the way you talk to teenagers of either sex? Is that why you don't see it as a problem?