Aide: Democrat leader heard of Foley e-mails in 2005 (Rahm)

[Ignacio Upton]

Aide: Democrat leader heard of Foley e-mails in 2005
Story Highlights
•Report: A House Dem staffer says he sent Foley e-mails to media, DCCC in 2005
•Aide says DCCC chairman heard of e-mails in very general terms
•DCCC chair Rahm Emanuel had said "no" when asked if he had known of them
•Foley resigned after inappropriate messages to teenager became public

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The head of the House Democrats' campaign committee, Rep. Rahm Emanuel, had heard of former Rep. Mark Foley's inappropriate e-mails to a former male page a year before they became public, a campaign committee aide told CNN.

Foley, a Republican, resigned after the scandal broke. House Speaker Dennis Hastert and other Republicans have suggested repeatedly that some Democrats knew about the e-mails earlier than they have acknowledged, but waited till midterm elections approached to bring up the issue.

Emanuel's campaign committee aide said Friday that the Illinois Democrat was informed in 2005, but never saw the correspondence and did not have enough information to raise concerns. The aide said Emanuel took "no action" because his knowledge was "cursory" and little more than "rumor."

The aide's acknowledgement differs from the flat "no" Emanuel gave in October when asked -- during an interview on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" -- if he or anyone on his staff knew of the e-mails before the scandal broke.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/09/foley.emanuel/index.html

[marmar]

1. Oh, so I guess the Repugs are going to try and turn this into a bipartisan scandal now?

Puh-leaze.

[Kagemusha]

2. Would people think 2 steps ahead and see the logical results?

If Emanuel had made the issue public, he'd be accused of outing a gay man for crass political purposes with a vicious accusation that, even if proven true, would not rise to the level of a criminal act. Isn't this painfully obvious?

[Ignacio Upton]

3. Unfortunately, now the GOP will spin this as us hiding the info

in order to use it for an October Surprise. It doesn't mean that Rahm necessarily knew and covered it up to HELP Foley like Hastert & Co. did, but it could say (MSM anyway) that Rahm knew something and waited to bring it up publically when it was convenient. Also, he did say on MTP that he did was not informed of the matter.

[Ignacio Upton]

4. Well Rahm just thought it was a rumor

Also, the same aide sent the info to newspapers and they didn't act either. I'm wondering if this was just that email where he asks about "a picture" and not the explicit IM's that prove he's a creep.

[William769]

8. you are absolutely correct

The sad thing is it will be people here on DU who don't like him to begin with, to try to make this non starter issue a huge mountain.

[MannyGoldstein]

5. What? A Clintonite Acting Clintonian?

At least it's nothing that can't be fixed by firing Howard Dean, who led the Democrats to a loss of "Rumsfeldian" proportions in the recent elections.

(Welcome to Clintonworld)

[William769]

9. Oy vey!

I can always count on you. :eyes:

[Hardrada]

11. Good one!

[Cocoa]

12. it depends on your definition of the word Clintonian

if by Clintonian you mean beating Republicans, then kudos to Rahm for being Clintonian. I hope all the dems strive to be as Clintonian as possible.

[MannyGoldstein]

13. Need I Remind You

From 1993-2004, the Clintons and their posse were in control of the Democratic Party. We got our clocks cleaned by Rethugs in every single congressional election during that period. An actual Democrat (Dean) took control of the Party for the 2006 election, and we kicked their butts. In fact, Rahm's own favored candidates did pretty poorly.

Clintonian machinations work pretty well for the Clintons themselves - but the "suck all of the air out of the room" strategy tends to kill off everyone around them.

[Cocoa]

16. what does that have to do with Mark Foley?

[alcibiades_mystery]

6. I have no doubt that the Dems orchestrated the Foley outing

It's clear as day. My question: so what? Good for them. It was smart politics and probably won us back the House and Senate. Fuck 'em.

As far as the people who would say "How could you allow this threat to the pages to continue?!?" I say "What threat?" Foley was an inappropriate douchebag, and probably a dirty old fool, but he wasn't really a threat to these kids.

So the Dems got down and dirty and played some vicious hardball. It's about fucking time, I say.

[Ignacio Upton]

7. My theory:

Rahm was informed about the email, but he probably didn't think it was credible...BUT, he kept his mouth shut this past October, because to do so at the time would have allowed the MSM to spin the story as "bipartisan." He didn't have the same access to the Foley story that the higher ups in the GOP had.

[Shakespeare]

10. Grammar Police to CNN: It's democrat-IC leader. n/t

[maine_raptor]

14. Good Catch!!!!

And not only that, notice how the lead sentence goes out of it's way to use the word "Democrats'", when the word "Democratic" reads and sounds a lot better.

Any bets on if that little bit of writing came from a "R"? It's too subtle by half.

[spanone]

15. Bullshit...where's Hastert in this story? HE WAS IN CHARGE