The fog of MSM lies

I use the word "fog" to describe not only the confusion created by the MSM (mainly ABC News) in reporting the Foley story, but also the "fog" of uncertainty they rely on when those interested in the truth, have to decide when the effort to learn that truth, becomes (or at least looks like) defending an obvious sexual predator.

What the MSM is ignoring...

The sexual predation committed by Bill Clinton, Gerry Studds, Mel Reynolds as well as the questionable antics of Barney Franks.

The lack of outrage on their part, as well as the DNC during those escapades.

The outrageous hypocrisy of defending Clinton and Studds then demanding the resignation of anyone and everyone who might have possibly suspected Foley's perversion.

But the greatest "fog" is being created by the deliberate vagueness when referring to the real evidence. Here's all the evidence that existed prior to the day of Foley's resignation...

The parents of a 16 year old complained of ambiguous, yet uncomfortable emails from Foley. The parents themselves didn't feel it worth an investigation; they simply wanted it to stop.

September 21st--an anonymous blogger posts anonymous emails from anonymous (alleged) Pages claiming Foley "pursued them".

That's it. Therefore had this information actually made it to Hastert, it still wasn't enough to warrant even an investigation, let alone the more serious demands the hypocrite Dems have made. Remember the Dems are demanding Hastert should have done, based on almost no evidence, what they say the government shouldn't do to known associates of terrorists: spy on them. Also note that in spite of requests by the family of the 16 year-old, ABC published the "ambiguous" emails, thus exposing the 16 year-old and his family to public scrutiny. So obviously Foley's not the only one willing to abuse minors for their own benefit.

The day Foley resigned...

Racy IMs between Foley and an "anonymous" former Page are published by ABC News.  ABC claims they are involving a minor, but quietly removed that claim when it was discovered, days later by a blogger investigating on his own that the IMs were between Foley and a college student, and only a small portion of the IMs were done before the student turned 18. They also continue to fail to note that the age of consent in Washington D.C. is 16. Meaningless for interstate emails and IMs, but evident of the hypocrisy of Democrats (who pushed for the lowered age of consent) who now consider Foley a threat. If it's a threat, the why the low age of consent?

Since then...

A former Page has come forward publicly to claim he was "warned". ABC and the other MSM consistently spins this as a warning that he's a sexual predator. The Page has attempted to clear up the confusion that what he was warned of was to not take Foley's attention seriously. The MSM continue to be intentionally vague about the initial statement so it has the appearance of evidence that Foley's proclivities were widely known to Republicans.

Recently more anonymous Pages has claimed they also received sexually suggesting IMs and emails from Foley. None of this was reported until after Foley resigned. They are being interviewed by the FBI, so their anonymity is only to the public (for now), and their statements and the evidence will become part of the investigation. But the MSM continue to push the false idea that the GOP leaders were aware all along of Foley's activities and tried to hide it.

Foley is obviously a creep and it's good that he's gone, but through this all we also see that the MSM has no qualms about exploiting minors for their own benefit. The blogger that perused the identity of the racy IMs only posted the identity when it was determined the student was 21 years-old and the IMs were done mostly after he had already turned 18. He's been criticized roundly for his investigative work, but in the end it's allowed more light to be shed on things the MSM didn't bother to investigate before jumping to conclusions. 

The MSM continue to refer to the racy IMs as "internet sex". I've read some samples of "internet sex" and those IMs don't even come close. I find it odd that the same people who insist on their right to pollute the airwave (and our living rooms) with the filth they put on TV, suddenly become uptight prudes when it comes to something that they can then distort to a club to beat the GOP with.

Demands for Hastert's resignation are more of the usual silliness on the part of Democrats, and incredibly-irresponsible over-reaction of the part of the few Republicans who have joined them. Even now the story is turning into a question of whether the GOP will "run off" all of their homosexuals. Who's to blame them if the standard they are held to is so unfairly high? There was no serious evidence against Foley, until the day he resigned, but the GOP is still being called "evil" for not catching him sooner. Meanwhile Democrats continue to enjoy freedom from scrutiny for their plethora of moral scandals. And the MSM also enjoys immunity form their abuse of the privacy of minors in publishing the original emails.

Finally, the age of consent laws in Washington D.C. would be something Congress decided. Who voted for such a low age? Why isn't the MSM letting us know who they are, and why aren't the Democrats demanding an investigation of them? If Foley's a danger for suggestive emails, then how much of a danger would those who voted to leave 16 and 17 year-olds unprotected in Washington D.C.? 

Posted by Danny Carlton at October 6, 2006 11:38 AM