…. how would the Democrats react?
Afterall, Bill Clinton pardoned sex offender and former Illinois Congressman Mel Reynolds, right? Anyone remember the massive wave of outrage expressed by Dems after he did it?
I don’t either. But you know it would happen in this case, considering their reaction to the Foley emails and IMs.
And just for the record, if Foley gets convicted of inappropriate conduct with a minor, I hope he gets served with the stiffest (no pun intended) of punishments and does NOT get a pardon. In fact, if he does get convicted of anything, I’m almost certain that Bush wouldn’t pardon him.
Just for kicks, let’s take a look at what the Snopes page has to say about Clinton’s pardon of Mel Reynolds:
Claim: An ex-congressman who had sex with a subordinate won clemency from a president who had sex with a subordinate, then was hired by a clergyman who had sex with a subordinate.
Status: True.
Example: [Collected on the Internet, 2001]
Jessie Jackson has added former Chicago democratic congressman Mel Reynolds to the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition’s payroll. Reynolds was among the 176 criminals excused in President Clinton’s last-minute forgiveness spree. Reynolds received a commutation of his six-and-a-half-year federal sentence for 15 convictions of wire fraud, bank fraud & lies to the Federal Election Commission. He is more notorious; however, for concurrently serving five years for sleeping with an underage campaign volunteer.
This is a first in American politics: An ex-congressman who had sex with a subordinate won clemency from a president who had sex with a subordinate, then was hired by a clergyman who had sex with a subordinate.
His new job? Youth counselor.
Origins: We can’t say with absolute certainty that what’s described above is “a first in American politics,” since the sexual peccadilloes of American politicians were not always as widely publicized as they are now, but the gist of the piece is true (although it originally circulated back in 2001, so it now references events that occurred several years ago and not ones that happened just recently):
- 1995-1997: President Bill Clinton’s sexual escapades with Monica Lewinsky, then a 21-year-old unpaid White House intern working in the office of Leon Panetta, Clinton’s Chief of Staff, hardly need recounting to anyone who hasn’t spent the last eight years on Mars.
- January 2001: The National Enquirer revealed that Jesse Jackson had been carrying on a four-year affair with Karin L. Stanford, a 39-year-old former aide with his Rainbow/PUSH Coalition staff, and that Jackson had fathered the child Stanford bore in May 1999. (Jackson has been married since 1963.)
- January 2001: Just before leaving office, President Clinton (at the urging of Jesse Jackson, among others) commuted the sentence of former Illinois congressman Mel Reynolds, who had spent 30 months in a state prison for having sex with a 16-year-old campaign volunteer and was serving a five-year sentence in federal prison for lying to obtain loans and illegally diverting campaign money for personal use.
- January 2001: The Chicago Sun-Times reported that former congressman Mel Reynolds would be working as the community development director of Salem Baptist Church in south-side Chicago, and as a consultant for Jesse Jackson’s Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, trying to decrease the number of young African-Americans going to prison. (Reynolds’ position would be more accurately characterized as that of an advisor on prison reform rather than a “Youth counselor,” however.)
I swear you cannot make this stuff up.
Thanks to reader DS for the link and memory refresher.
BTW, here’s the latest development on the Foley scandal: his lawyer is claiming Foley was sexually abused as a child - by a priest. Here we go.
Update I: I’m with Captain Ed on Foley’s lawyer’s ‘revelation.’
Update II: “FFF“?
Update III: Lorie Byrd blogs about a Democratic phone sex scandal regarding Democrat congressional candidate Mike Arcuri (NY).
Update IV: Orin Kerr at the Volokh Conspiracy law blog writes about the legal issues related to the Foley case. (Hat tip: Instapundit)
Update: I would not want to be Foley’s lawyer.
Prior:
Over at Newsbusters, http://newsbusters.org/node/8054, there’s an interesting post, “WaPo Shocker: Huge Difference in Handling of Democrat and Republican Sex Scandals.” It’s interesting because the paper admits the double standard, but hangs it on the Repubs’ “socially conservative image.”
Frankly, that makes sense to me. I expect the likes of Clinton, Jesse “I am qual-E-fied” Jackson, Barney Frank et al to be corrupt in matters of sexual behavior. It’s one of the few things you can count on from them, in addition to hypocracy. With the Repubs one expects a marginally higher standard in this area.
I think the electorate is smart enough to recognize a political hustle when they see it (yes, I do question the timing). But I don’t expect the Foley affair to have a major impact on the election. If the voters shift control of Congress to the Dems, it’ll be because of the stalemate in Iraq.
Comment by Redhand @ 10/3/2006 - 10:56 pm
Why would W pardon him? forget the dem reaction. What would be the red state reaction?
Comment by brad @ 10/3/2006 - 11:16 pm
I don’t care what happened to him as a child, if Foley is guilty, he needs to be punished to the fullest extent considering his status. We on the right DO expect better from our elected reps.
However….
And this is in response to Redhand. Though I think you’re correct in the perceptions of each party, I think it needs to be mentioned that the right is made up of human beings who are subject to all of the same temptations as anyone else. The real difference between the parties (more precisely, between libs and cons) is that on the right, we still know bad behavior is wrong even if we succomb at times to its allure, and we don’t try to redefine it or justify it.
Comment by Marshall Art @ 10/3/2006 - 11:57 pm
It is quite telling that when a Republican gets into a situation like this, they resign. When a Democrat does? They get re-elected…
Comment by camojack @ 10/4/2006 - 1:21 am
Redhand, with all due respect, the only thing stale mate, is the misinformed constant babble of disinformation streaming from the beaks and wasted keystrokes of those in opposition to America’s efforts, in completing the mission in Iraq.
I’m with you 100% Marshall. Choices are are made, not hatched from some lame reactionary status, but only if you choose to make that choice. Hence the root word…….CHOOSE!!!
Comment by forest hunter @ 10/4/2006 - 1:31 am
ST Dems double standard again.
Comment by stackja @ 10/4/2006 - 5:15 am
Besides the Democrat and media double standard, what pisses me off is that people who sat on this will not be prosecuted and jailed for allowing this abuse of the Pages (children) go on solely as a gambit in a Democrat powergrab. This is what is so SICK about this.
Foley is a sick puppy that needs to be dealt with, BUT in this case of the ends justifies the means, why aren’t the core issue of the abuse of the Pages being looked at from the tangent of supressing the information for years by people how have legal and moral obligations to report it immediately. I am talking about the reporters, news organizations, and the secret source. I can understand why the source is hiding. They face serious jail time for allowing this to go on until now.
Comment by PCD @ 10/4/2006 - 8:59 am
bubba not only pardoned reynolds he also pardoned some terrorists, need I say more?
Comment by Drewsmom @ 10/4/2006 - 9:20 pm
Just switched over to cnn during a commercial, they have 5 dems and 1 conservative on, now thats what I call FAIR AND BALANCED …… GOOD LORD, how I hate the lame stream media and larry king is still an idiot. Snakehead carville is sick, Blitz W. is fool and the lone Republican, the black x-ballplayer, forget his name is about to hurl. He does have guts to go king with these characters.
Comment by Drewsmom @ 10/4/2006 - 9:41 pm
Reynolds was sentenced to five years in prison and expected to be released in 1998. However, in April 1997, he was convicted on 15 unrelated counts of bank fraud and lying to SEC investigators. These charges resulted in an additional sentence of 78 months in federal prison. Reynolds served all of his first sentence and served forty-two months in prison for the later charges. At that point, U.S. President Bill Clinton commuted the sentence for bank fraud. As a result, Reynolds was released from prison and served the remaining time in a half way house”- Wikipedia
So you see, Clinton pardoned the bank fraud not the sex charge. Typical NeoCon immature bully attitude “He did it first!” Like somehow that makes it OK to be a sexual predator of teenagers. Gee, why look at the immoral behavior of your side when you can spend so much time diverting attention on something that happened nearly 10 years ago. Let’s your side off the hook I suppose but it still doesn’t make Foley’s, Delay’s, Abramoff’s, Cunningham’s, or all the others who are involved in the current GOP Culture of Corruption to be excused for their behavior. You demand moral and ethical purity for anyone else but when your side gets caught with their proverbial pants down you cry “Foul” and start spinning the excuses for their behavior. We can’t change what happened in the past but we can make right what is happening now. When you fight so hard to defend their behavior it makes your side look like you approve of child predation and other forms of corruption. Why can’t you just owe up to the fact that Foley and the rest of those who’ve been charged with corruption were creeps and don’t belong in your club. Doing otherwise just makes all of you look just as corrupt and ridiculous.
Comment by Theda @ 10/11/2006 - 2:26 pm
He got the man out of jail, for crying out loud! Does that not matter to you guys at all? Pathetic.
As for the rest of what you wrote, what an idiotic distortion of what the right is doing regarding the Foley case - people like me and others aren’t excusing Foley, saying it’s “ok” or “it was just sex” (or in this case sexual conversation) like the left did with Bubba - we are questioning the timing, who leaked the info etc.
Get your facts straight before you throw out such non-sensical accusations in the future. It just makes you look uninformed, and your delivery childish.
Comment by Sister Toldjah @ 10/11/2006 - 2:39 pm