A Missed Question: Why did the parents want to drop the matter - QUIETLY?

[TwentyFive]

Regarding the GOP leadership: Is there anybody else here that's suspicious about the parents never pursuing the matter?

Parents just don't walk away from sexual predators. Any normal parent would be outraged and work to see that the predator suffers some consequences.

Did the GOP leadership bribe the parents into silence. Or alternatively, maybe threats were made to the families? At the very least, there needs to be a some investigation into possible illegal actions traced back to Hastert and his goons.

[grasswire]

1. maybe they got a payoff

makes sense, no?

[shadowknows69]

51. Or were flat out threatened

n/t

[BluePatriot]

2. definitely some $$$ n/t

[Seen the light]

3. Probably very simple

They probably were afraid of their child's private masturbation techniques being read by the entire world.

Even if they were assured that his identity would never be revealed, there are still plenty of people I'm sure of that know exactly who this kid is and have read his IM conversations.

[Divernan]

18. No, the 1st kid to complain received 3 emails, did not get into

the instant messaging with the really obscene 2-way discussions. And it was the first kid's parents' claim not to want to pursue matters which the GOP leadership used as an excuse to take no action.

I think it was cowardly and despicable of these parents - because they should have realized that unless somebody spoke out, this pedophile would continue to pursue underage boys. One factor is probably that the parents were prominent Republicans because that's the way their son got one of these prestigious congressional page jobs. Perhaps they were told that things were being taken care of out of the public eye, and that all the pages were being warned about the guy, etc.

[bobbolink]

53. I understand your view, but before you rush to judgement,

remember what women go through in reporting rape.

I would never judge a woman who decided against reporting and charging the rapist, because some just can't handle going through that ugliness.

It's the nature of our system to put the victim on trial.

Until you're in those shoes, it's really not fair to angrily judge someone else.

[JerseygirlCT]

57. I agree. nt

[rzemanfl]

4. Would you want the entire world to know the length of your son's

penis (even though it is longer than average)?

[TwentyFive]

9. True - but I would still want to see the predator shut down.

If I were the father, I would demand to meet with Hastert, and get his personal assurance that (at the very least) Foley would be stripped of his committee assignment, ordered into counseling, and agree not to run for re-election.

How could they go on with their lives, knowing that this guy is out there, preying on other underage boys? That's what doesn't add up.

They don't have to go to the media, but there are other actions they could have taken.

[rzemanfl]

21. Both of our conclusions assume that the parents knew the content

of the instant messages, not just the e-mails. That assumption may not be warranted.

[Garbo 2004]

47. The IM's are from 2003 . Emails are from 2005 and a different former page.

The La kid got nonsexual emails from Foley that creeped him out and didn't respond but forwarded them to a staffer in Alexander's office where he used to work. Alexander's office later contacted the parents who knew about the emails which had no sexual content. Two different kids, two different kinds of communications. We don't know squat about the kid who had the IM sex discussions with Foley in 2003.

[rzemanfl]

55. So much Repuke crap, so little time. Thanks. Hard to keep up

with all this.

[shanti]

17. whuuuuuuut??

i must have missed this. did the kid take photos and send to foley??

[Hav]

24. .

No but it was part of the IMs. Foley asked and the kid replied about the length.
If you haven't read the conversations until now, believe me, you should be lucky because you would regret it.

[rzemanfl]

37. Foley asked one kid to get a ruler and measure his (the kid's). nt

[kath]

26. THIS kid(from Lousiana) is NOT the one involved in the IM exchange about

masturbation, measuring the length of his penis, etc. THAT exchange occurred in 2003, with one or more OTHER EX-pages.

(on edit - the LA kid started receiving e-mails from Foley in **2005**, AFTER he completed his page-ship, and after he had sent or given Foley a thank-you note)

[babylonsister]

5. The snarky side of me wants to say they're repugs.

That's just as bad or good as an excuse as for the $$. You'd think they'd be more concerned with their son and other pages that might provide temptation to the perv.

[sweetheart]

6. because of blacklisting

The republicans would destroy the career of a traitor, deliberately, just like a prison gang.
A sex slave gone informant would be perceived by the highest eschelon as a violation of
protocol, and the informant's friends and family, all business associations need to seriously
be afraid from the feds. The mob's in town, and until they leave, there is only ONE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT.

[kath]

7. The parents who "dropped it" were the parents of the Louisiana kid who

in 2005, received emails from Foley about sending a photo, what did he want for his birthday, etc -- fairly innocent stuff, NOTHING of a sexual nature. SInce the e-mails were not sexual and only seemed a bit weird, it makes total sense that these parents let the matter drop. The kid was no longer a page at the time, BTW.

There is a LOT of confusion surrounding the whole Foley kerfluffle - the steamy IM (instant messaging, NOT e-mail) exchange about masturbation, etc, took place in **2003**, with a different ex-page (or ex-pages).

[Justice Is Comin]

8. How do we know they wanted to "drop" anything?

We've only been told that by guess who?

Not only may that be another lie, it may have been casually suggested by Alexander. Stay tuned.

[TwentyFive]

19. Oh, I forgot. I read they 'dropped the issue' in the reliable old MSM

I forgot to filter the MSM news through my BullSh1t detector.

[EFerrari]

10. Maybe they don't want their kids rep "ruined" in public? It would be

a very difficult decision to make, don't you think? And ever after, that kid is the Foley kid. It's like stealing his life. :(

[Hav]

11. .

I am pretty sure that they only knew about the emails and not the AIM-conversations.
Further, just like the other pages, they were only good republicans (why else are their kids pages) and it's about "loyalty" and power.

[warrior1]

12. See: Michael Jackson payoff

This seems typical of rich guys getting caught.

[MoonRiver]

13. Unfortunately many families don't press charges in sexual abuse cases.

It involves the issue of further traumatizing one's child. Maybe the boy didn't want it all to become public. Without additional information, I'm not going to assume the parents were bribed or anything else.

[TwentyFive]

27. But if there was a PAYOFF - it would be a HUGE DISASTER for the GOP

Can you imagine a sex bribery scandle that hits the GOP leadership, just days before an election? ;)

Not that I'm looking to make hay out of other people's misery, but if bribery was what the GOP did, then every voter deserves to know about it.

[Bluerthanblue]

46. I hope that compassion for

their child is what motivated them-
Sadly, experience speaks to me, more of not wanting the shame and stigma of being a family who has faced this garbage. Not wanting people to point, or whisper, or gossip- and make judgments or run with bits of truth and mix in alot of fiction.

Denial is insidious- and evil- it allows bad things to keep happening-(to OTHER children) and it reinforces the damage done, by reinforcing the belief that the child is someone who is bad, should be ashamed, and must never let anyone know-

SILENCE is the abusers friend- NOT the child's- and I don't care what anyone says- the ADULT in the situation ALWAYS bears the responsibility for the wrong done. There are few moral absolutes (in my world) THIS is one of them.

I've born the agony of knowing that had I spoken up to people who could HEAR- who didn't hush, cover-up, and excuse the inexcusable.. at least 2 young children would likely never have to endure what I endured beginning at the age of 5. And no matter how I try and excuse myself, or wonder how medical professionals, family friends, teachers, and care-givers could have just let things keep going without having the courage to do something, I still feel guilty, dirty, and ashamed. Times were different then, professionals didn't HAVE to report abuse, and everyone figured it would just 'go away' if we pretended it wasn't happening.

The option of $ never entered the situation- It was shame, and social stigma, as well as not wanting to 'face the reality' that someone who seemed so 'normal' to the adults, was in reality a very very sick and troubled man.

........
I hope the parents let their child know they aren't ashamed of him. And it was HIM they wanted to protect- not their image, or Foley's-

[sandnsea]

14. I let one go, my daughter asked me to

One of her bosses was a real ass, made sexual comments all the time. She quit after just a few weeks and asked me to let it go. I did, and yes that's part of the reason I'm furious over this. I know what it does to the kids. Most girls have had this happen to them. It's no different when it happens to boys, and it doesn't matter whether it's a pretty female teacher or an old gay man. It's all wrong. Leave kids the hell alone you goddamn perverts!!!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

15. This Particular Incident Wasn't That Big Of A Deal.

Though it was a bit disturbing to the parents for sure, I can see why they could've chosen to not pursue it. This particular incident wasn't really all that explicit.

The really explicit violations were towards other pages, not this one.

[kath]

23. Thanks OMC - please, people, read what I posted above-the LA kid did not

receive ANY e-mails of a sexual nature from Foley.

The long steamy, IM exchange (not e-mail) was from ***2003*** with another kid (or kids) entirely.

There is so much confusion/misinformation surrounding the Foley flap...

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

16. Sex sells. eom.

[onecent]

30. Where did you find this picture? LOL. It's great!

[Tom Yossarian Joad]

43. One of mine.... Feel free to share it!

[BrklynLiberal]

20. $$$$$$$$$$$$?

[cwydro]

34. I am going to agree

with you....no doubt.

[madmusic]

22. Because the reaction and overreaction can be more traumatizing

Than the chat was. Allegedly, the parents who said that were the parents of the teen who got the request for a pic. Very mild compared to the chats, and the chat parents might not have known about it.

[Joanne98]

25. Republicans don't care if congress critters molest their children

As long as they GET ANOTHER TAX CUT!

[TwentyFive]

29. Yes. When it comes to money vs. children - the money wins every time

[undeterred]

28. When a woman charges an employer with sexual harrassment

it tends to stay with her, however unfairly, wherever she goes.

Maybe well meaning parents thought that this could be bad for their son's career?

[moc]

31. Considering some RW blogs are posting the boy's identity and contact info

I can't say I blame them.

I'm not saying what they did was right, but as the parent of two young children, I can understand.

[madmusic]

Then we should get their info and post it. nt

EDIT: links? We could probably figure out who they are.

[moc]

38. ....

Are you serious? Please tell me that was snark.

[madmusic]

41. Why not?

If they are posting the boys' info, why not theirs?

[moc]

44. Oooohhh, you mean the RWer's contact info?

I thought you meant the contact information for the boy's parents. :blush:

Yeah, I agree with you.

By the way, I haven't seen the posts by RWers myself, which is why I can't post a link. I've just heard others talking about it.

[madmusic]

50. Maybe someone will post links. n/t

[moc]

32. Dupe self-delete

[rocktivity]

33. Charge the parents as accessories, bring them in for questioning

and let's see is they corroborate the congressmen's story!

:headbang:
rocknation

[stella]

35. They sacrafice their kids for bush and the gop

mothers and fathers of dead soldiers agree with bush stay the course in iraq.

[Garbo 2004]

36. Don't confuse the 2005 emails to the La kid with the 2003 IM's with

another former page. The emails weren't sexual or explicit. Not much there to pursue except to say the kid/parents didn't want any more communications from Foley.

The published sexually explicit IM's from 2003 with another former page had nothing to do with the kid from La or his parents.

[kath]

40. Thanks, Garbo, I've been trying to spread the word on this as well -

confusion is running rampant here!

[Garbo 2004]

48. Well as much as folks here complain about the media and RWers

misconstruing facts and passing on bad info, some here don't bother to get it right either, even when the info is readily available and sources are posted here at DU.

It shouldn't be that difficult to draw a distinction between nonsexual emails received by a former page in 2005 who cut off communication with Foley because the nonsexual emails creeped him out and graphic sexual discussions via IM between Foley and another former page in 2003.

Instead some people here conflate the two and bash the La kid's parents, attributing to them knowledge of the 2003 IM's that had nothing to do with their kid. Go figure. :shrug:

[lumberjack_jeff]

39. Reality is, parents treat sons different than daughters.

There's little doubt in my mind that had Foley been caught engaging in criminal sexual behavior with a 16 year old female page, let alone several of them, it would have been news before now.

People, especially the kind of people who would send their kids to be pages for Republicans in Washington, would be embarrassed to reveal that their sons might be gay/bisexual.

[TwentyFive]

45. I think you are quite right

This page is obviously gay. Any parent with a clue would see this, and being republicans from Lousiana...they are probably anti-gay and have some enormous shame around their son's sexual orientation.

[Garbo 2004]

49. The kid from La was not the kid who had IM discussions with Foley.

The La kid was creeped out by the nonsexual emails from Foley and cut off communications with Foley. This was in 2005.

The IM's are from 2003 and are from a different source, as was noted by ABC when they published the IM's on Friday.

[SmokingJacket]

42. Probably want their kids to become politicians.

I'd assume that a lot of pages are interested in a future political career.

The parents are afraid it won't look good if they tried to bring down a congressman.

[BlooInBloo]

52. Because they're republicans with a gay/gay-curious son. Duh.

[cynatnite]

54. They trusted the repukes to handle it...

I bet they were assured it was no big deal and the parents took their word for it. I do feel for them most especially since all this exploded on the front pages and in the news.

Now, they're going to do everything they can to protect their son.

[gatorboy]

56. Payoff, I'd suspect.

And if that ever came out...Oh, brother....

[Warren DeMontague]

58. I'm not going to second guess the actions of this kids' parents.

Who knows. Remember when you were 16? Think this kid wants the world to know what was in those IMs?