Reply With Quote
Some of the ones he sent messages to were minors, but he was only alleged to have sex with pages who had attained the age of majority.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Foley_Scandal
If I remember correctly it can clearly be heard in one of the video clips taken at a town hall meeting, and that seems to be the source of the claim.
If the secret service guy, or the people they interviewed were farther away than the microphone, than the person who yelled it, it would stand to reason that they might not have picked out a shouted two words in the middle of a mush.
Some of the ones he sent messages to were minors, but he was only alleged to have sex with pages who had attained the age of majority.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Foley_Scandal
Thanks, RG.
You're welcome.
The way the write-ups about it sounded, however, they made it sound like Palin must have heard it; and were critical of her for not denouncing it on the spot. Oh well, we're on the Joe the Plumber now.
why does every thread have to turn gay?
(in ray's honor)
Wow...
I get to say this twice today...
Just another liberal lie that you kool-aid drinking lemmings here believe.
How many tims have I mentioned you are a fool unless you verify?
"Treason" and "Terrorist" are on tape.
http://multimedia.boston.com/pub/tn/...tid=1859060243
You guys still want to talk about how clean McCain's campaign is? Yep. He's promoting good vibes all the way.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/1..._n_135336.htmlArlington, Va.: The Secret Service has now labeled the "kill him" report as unfounded. Why isn't The Post giving this report as much coverage as the original false report received?
Dana Milbank:
Glad you asked, because I saw this earlier. This is actually about the incident in Scranton, not the one in Clearwater, Fla, that I wrote about here.
I wasn't at the Scranton event, but I have to say the Secret Service is in dangerous territory here. In cooperation with the Palin campaign, they've started preventing reporters from leaving the press section to interview people in the crowd. This is a serious violation of their duty -- protecting the protectee -- and gets into assisting with the political aspirations of the candidate. It also often makes it impossible for reporters to get into the crowd to question the people who say vulgar things. So they prevent reporters from getting near the people doing the shouting, then claim it's unfounded because the reporters can't get close enough to identify the person.
Odd how this thread suddenly goes quiet when proof is offered, isn't it?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
