Blackmail?: Foley was on the fence over CAFTA

[Rose Siding]

This kos diarist asks a disturbing question:

Foley blackmail????
by Magster
Sun Oct 01, 2006 at 09:17:06 AM PDT
In the midst of my Sunday morning blog reading, a story posted on Talking Points Memo (http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/...) aroused my curiousity. The story by DK talks about what the Republican leadership knew about Foley, and specifically discusses that Delay knew each GOP representatives likes and dislikes intimately.

I then wondered if Foley was a swing vote on any bills passed by Congress this year, and a quick Google search later...

turns out that Foley was sitting on the fence on the CAFTA bill that passed 217-215. Foley's vote was so much in doubt, that Foley was personally called by President Bush very shortly before the vote.

http://www.tradeobservatory.org/...

Does anyone think that the GOP leadership saw the pedophilia tendencies of Rep. Foley as an opportunity rather than a problem? Nothing would surprise me anymore.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/10/1/12176/7489

The gop leadership must have known the risk involved in covering up Foley's activities. Staffers are now telling reporters that they were well known. What would be worth taking that risk?

[Dems Will Win]

1. Damn beat me to it!

This is the next layer of the story that keeps on giving

[Rose Siding]

3. I can't figure why the would have protected him without an "upside"

-and thinking that it was just to avoid a scandal (that would have been behind them by the mid-terms!) just doesn't cut it. -Especially considering DeLay's legendary tight grip over his caucus and his vote-counting ability at the time.

[Hav]

2. Take a look at this thread, too

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2275680

Also from this thread:
kpete
Looking at Foley’s campaign fund, I noticed something. His contributions to the NRCC changed over the last three election cycles.

2002-$35,826 LINK http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/expendetail.asp?...
2004-$15,000 LINK http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/expendetail.asp?...
2006-$115,000 LINK http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/expendetail.asp?...

Hmm, what changed in 2005-06 cycle? Oh, yeah, those pesky emails.

http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/10/01/whats-100k-betwee...

[Rose Siding]

4. Geeze, not TOO obvious!

:wow:

[Imagevision]

6. That's why Pelosi wants ethics committee to testify under oath

Reynolds, Hastert, "Boner" etc.

[Lurking Dem]

5. He was also pro-choice

fwiw

[Rose Siding]

7. Sort of -NARAL gives him a 30% rating

http://issues2002.org/FL/Mark_Foley.htm

He did vote in favor of stem cell research, but his vote wouldn't have been critical on that one.

Still, I bet that the interests of big business trump gop pandering to religious groups.

[Lurking Dem]

9. I remember reading once

that the pro-lifers were gravely concerned about his abortion stance.

But I still think it was all just hubris (the forte of Republicans everywhere). They thought they could keep it all hush hush through the elections because their balls are bigger than their brains.

[NanceGreggs]

8. I think you hit THAT nail squarely on the head, RS!

"What would be worth taking that risk?"

Indeed.

The GOP HAD TO KNOW what this would do once uncovered -- and these things always are uncovered, eventually.

THEY KNEW A YEAR AGO ... with the mid-terms looming in twelve months and the importance of keeping control ever-present in their minds. So WHY NOT get Foley to quietly resign 'for health reasons', whatever, before the story got out?

IT MAKES YOU WONDER (a) how many influential elected Repubs have been manipulated into 'loyalty' to the Administration through threats of having their skeletons pulled out of the closet, and (b) how many Repubs are given campaign support etc. to get them into office simply BECAUSE they have something to hide, which makes them more malleable when it comes to their voting decisions?

It also goes a long way in explaining everyone's quick cooperation in covering each other's asses: "You watch my back, and I'll watch yours." THAT'S a plan that works REALLY WELL when EVERYBODY has a little something to hide.

[Rose Siding]

10. From the things we've seen them do in the open-

remember when they threatened the livlihood of one congressman's son in order to get his vote? -we know how low they sink to win.

It's just a theory, but it's one I have no qualms about calling entirely possible.

I think you're right about how this would have blown over by now had they decided to weather it way back. -and it would have been a fraction of the scandal w/o a cover up! The gop machine (and that's JUST who's in the thick of it) made a decision for a reason.

[Mabus]

12. I'm also suspicious of Rodney Alexander

He was a Dem until 2004 when he became a Rethug. There are several sources (including the wiki) that say Alexander was promised a seat on the Appropriations Committee if he switched parties. Also Alexander's voting ACU rating went sky high last year.

According to the wiki "At first, Alexander's voting record was not typical of former Democrats who switched to the Republicans. For example, his American Conservative Union rating in 2004 was 50, only two points above his 2003 rating. In 2005, however, he joined the conservative Republican Study Committee, and his voting record veered sharply to the right; his ACU rating that year was 92." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_Alexander#Party-switching_for_the_2004_Election

If Alexander was willing to switch parties to gain a committee seat, it makes me wonder what the GOP leadership gave him to keep quiet on the Foley matter.

[Straight Shooter]

13. "... it makes me wonder what the GOP leadership gave him to keep quiet"

Maybe it isn't what they gave him. Maybe it's what they threatened to take away.

[Mabus]

14. Good point

It could go either way.

[williesgirl]

11. Happy to provide 5th vote

[The Backlash Cometh]

15. This needs to be looked into.

I bet Foley will be in a position at some point in the future to use information to plea bargain.