You can’t have it both ways. If you want Hastert et al to resign because nothing had happened yet with Foley, but might happen later, then you’re duty bound to explain to us why you think it was OK for Tip O’Neill – who knew Studds was kiddie-diddling for years before he was caught – to stay on.

By your logic, if applied consistently, any Dem who (1) gave Studds a standing ovation while he flipped off the entire country during his censure hearing, or (2) failed to call for him to resign thereafter should immediately resign. Since those Democrats approved of his deeds (or at least knew of them), and since he refused to apologize and accept responsibility, a reasonable person would conclude he was likely to repeat them. Therefore, all such Dems should resign using tom-logic. Q.E.D.

Of course, the key phrase there is “if applied consistently”, which you’re clearly unwilling to do.

Give it up…you couldn’t answer anything I asked on the previous thread, and can’t answer anything Baklava asked here. All you keep doing is reinforcing our point that you guys have lower standards – far lower – for elected officials than we do.

The other groups saw nothing actionable either. Nothing to go on. If you are now changing your story please tell us WHAT in the “email” was actionable. Back to my original set of questions that you have to either change answers on or fail to realize you are in checkmate.

We know you are smarter than 2 newspapers, the FBI and REpublican leadership. So now point to what was actionable in the “email”.

Now for part 2 – What woudl’ve been your action based upon the actionable evidence that you are pointint to in the email? Not to worry. This one isn’t really tricky…..

My, my, my, evidently when it is Gerry Studds molesting pages, it WAS alright, many of your democrat reps gave Studds three standing ovations for telling the US House to “kiss off” as his response to being censured. Then, Tip O’Neill did noting. That is the precedent you Democrats set. Live with the truth, tom.

Now, Foley is gone. You and your disingenuous colleagues are applying a different standard to Hastert than you applied to O’Neill. If enabling and condoning child molestation deserves removal from the US House, then start with each and every Democrat that applauded Studds, Barney Frank, Charlie Rangel,… Then, when you prove that Hastert was shown the IM’s, not just the email, then you have a case, until then, tom, you just are a disingenuous partisan trying to scam your way into power.

- Bang

PCD, are you saying is that it’s ok if he knew about illicit activity as long as it isn’t illegal? That makes sense, lets wait until he acutally molests the kid!

Boehner said he told Hastert here, or did he change his story?

Boehner said he told Hastert here, or did he change his story?

Meanwhile most have let slide that charge of child pornogrpahy has been dismissed on Karr and a prosecutor who thought this was a slam dunk, now looks foolish that the man they brought over on a private jet, sipping champagne and eating prawns, just got off scot free.

North Korea is gearing up for a Nuclear Test, and Russia and China probably could use our help, but we are too wrapped up in Foley to pay much attention to that in Congress, the Media, ect.

People, Democrats and even some republicans have called for Hasterts resigniation, and with the Republicans they are thinking that this would show that Republicans are taking removing of corruption from the party very seriously to the base, but all that will do will again open this up for a longer debate, especially since to replace Hastert they will have to convene and vote, on a new speaker, and you know the Democrats will keep dragging this out as long as they can.

Now, whether Hastert will keep his job after the election, I don’t think he will. He will either resign or asked to step aside after the election.

Meanwhile Pelosi seems to think she is the one for the job, that perhaps to clean this up needs a “womans” touch….if that is so, then I vote for Ann Coulter to replace him.

Then let the Hilarity begin.

Boehner said he knew about “inappropriate contact” this spring and told Hastert. Once again, apparently we need to wait until he actually breaks laws to stop the conduct.

PCD, Edited. –ST

HASTERT: Didn’t know of the IMs, but would have removed Foley.

O’Neill/Tom Foley/Democrat Leadership: Left Studds in Congress without penalty for 6 terms AFTER knowing and having public reaction to Studds having sex with underage pages.

Now, what don’t you understand, Edited. –ST?

These libs kind of remind me of Wile E. Coyote. They think they’re super-geniuses, much smarter than we are, and always seem to wind up dropping the anvil on their own heads.

He is either wrong about one thing or the other and he needs to decide where he was wrong. He is in checkmate. Ain’t no way out. He’s done here. All can see the clear loss.

Exactly. Checkmate. Thanks for playing.

You wrote later in the same post, “perceived his failure to do his job.”

You just talked out of both sides of your mouth. You got outsmarted and DON’T even KNOW IT. Anything you say at this point beyond an apology to Hastert would be incredible.

Even you admit there was nothing actionable in the Emails. They were known, referred to the FBI, and found not actionable. Seems to me that calling in the FBI does not exactly amount to a coverup. But you still want another 5 or 6 Republicans to lose their jobs anyway. So please, explain to us how not engaging in a cover-up amounts to wrongdoing. And can we deduce from that that actually engaging in a cover-up is laudable in your world?

You keep confusing the issue. No one is blaming the Dems for Foley’s conduct. That’s his fault and his alone. What we are doing, and are perfectly justified to do, is point out how the same people (such as you) who feign indignace at Foley’s conduct give standing ovations and committee chairmanship to people who have done much, much worse. So you really ought to get off your sudden moral high horse.