Sunday, October 08, 2006

Ex-page says he had sex with Foley

A former Congressional page, who is refusing to reveal his identity, says he had sex with Foley. But he is quite adamant it was years after he was page. He was 21 years old at the time. And he says he kept his instant messages from Foley as well. (I find this aspect rather bizarre.)

In one message after the young man admitted he was gay Foley responded: "I always knew you were a player but I don't fool around with pages." So far all the evidence points to this being true. It has been stated that none of the pages received emails of a suspicious nature from Foley while they were working in Congress.

And for the first time a major newspaper has revealed the big secret of this feeding frenzy: the age of consent in DC is 16 years of age. It looks as if this page pursued Foley. He said: "I knew he was gay, and he was attracted to me." The young man went to see Foley about four years after he finished his term as a page.

If you don't think this is being pushe out of proportion to the case then consider this. I decided to check Google news and typed in "Foley" and find there are 35,900 recent stories. At the time this broke there was also the horrible murder of five young girls at an Amish school. The adult who killed them went there with the intention of molesting them first. These were very young girl. Foley wrote raunchy e-mails to individuals above the age of consent while this man executed the children. But when I search for Amish on Google news they turn up 10,600 stories in recent weeks.

The Foley e-mails to grown young men apparently is three times as news worthy as a man going to a school house, selecting the young girls for molestation and executing them. It's nice to know the American media has their priorities right.

Meanwhile the malicious Michelle Malkin contradicts herself in an column attacking Foley. She says "Foley's targets were underage high school students serving as congressional pages." She also says: "Most are high school juniors at least 16 years of age." Now if they are at least 16 years of age then how were they underage if the age of consent in DC is 16? Malkin either doesn't know or is hiding that she does know these teens were not underage.

In addition there is a clear pattern indicating that Foley did not target send the raunchy e-mails to anyone while they were a page but did so after they were no longer working there. She also refers to "Foley's reported communications with minors" while ignoring that only one individual has been identified by name who received this communications and he was almost 19 years old at the time. One unidentified page says he got such correspondence from Foley and had sex with him but he was 21 years old at the time.

Malkin twists the facts when she mentions Gerry Studds relationship with a page. She says "Studds was defiant, calling his 'relationship' with his teen prey 'consensual'." She ignores the fact that the page was above the age of consent and that the page in question publicly said his relationship with Studds was consenting and that he resented other people sticking their nose in his life. So the "young prey" Malkin refers to most certainly did not see himself as prey at all but a willing, consenting individual above the age of consent.

The more I look at how this story is being presented the more I am convinced that anti-gay bigotry, acknowledged by the Right, and unacknowledged by the Left, is a major contributing factor to the hysteria. Otherwise how do you explain so many people leaving out the fact that all pages are above the age of consent in DC? How do you explain that even when the identity of one page is reveals proving he was in fact over 18 at the time that press reports still refer to him as underage. The facts are in plain view but the twist given to the stories do not correspond with them.