• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Dennis Hastert quote

Help Support Ranchers.net:

the chief

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 17, 2005
Messages
385
Reaction score
0
Location
midwest
"We know there are reports of people that knew it and kind of fed it out or leaked it to the press," Hastert said. "That's why we've asked for an investigation. So, let me just say, that's why we've asked for an investigation, to find who that is."

So it sounds to me like Hastert is MORE concerned with finding out WHO leaked this info to the press than the fact that he covered up for a homo pedephile for several years.

Now, I don't mean to pick SOLELY on Hastert, but these politicians let each other get away with fraud, theft, deception, immoral lewd acts, and extortion (DeLay) and then have the balls to blame the guy who leaked it to the press.

This country needs fixing and it needs to start in DC. :oops:
 
Technically he's not a pedophile. In Washington legal age is 16. Not saying I agree with the fact that 16 is old enough for a kid to be considered of legal age just stating what the law is there. Usually educated people are smart enough to look into the fine laws and be walking close to the line without crossing it. Plus didn't you all hear he went right away to rehab? Seems that is a common thing with society realize you are gonna get caught doing something that will make you look bad and run to rehab so you have an excuse. :roll:
 
Morally he is a pedophile.

so if your "educated" you can abuse the laws to suit your needs?

doesn't say much for higher education if that is the values that adults get from theses places......

Foly is a scum bag. CattleArmy your posts appear to define the law in favor of him, why?

add in that the targeted child was in another state. and ignore the "federal guidelines" and you might have an arguement to support his disgusting behavior.

"a child means every human being below the age of 18 years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier."

"clearly specifies the upper age limit for childhood as 18 years,"

"The article, thus, accommodates the concept of an advancement of majority at an earlier age, either according to the federal or State laws of a country, or personal laws. However, the upper limit on childhood is specified as an age of 'childhood' rather than 'majority', recognising that in most legal systems, a child can acquire full legal capacity with regard to various matters at different ages.
Thus, defines a "child" as every human being below the age of 18 years, it allows for minimum ages to be set, under different circumstances, balancing the evolving capacities of the child with the State's obligation to provide special protection. Accordingly, legislation has minimum ages defined under various laws related to the protection of child rights."
 
The law in this case does favor Foley cause in DC the ' legal' age is 16!

Doesn't mean he's not ' scum'.....just one who knows the laws!
 
Ole Foley could still face some charges....

---------------------------------------------------------

Foley Could Face State Charges
Saturday, October 07, 2006




WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — Even if former Rep. Mark Foley did not violate federal laws by exchanging sexually explicit Internet communications with underage boys, he still could find himself charged under state statutes.

Federal law generally requires a person to meet, or attempt to meet, a minor for sex before a crime has been committed. But in some states where the Florida Republican communicated with children, attempting to seduce a minor might be enough to bring charges.

Federal prosecutors investigating Foley are examining whether Florida authorities might be better positioned to seek charges against him, according to a senior Justice Department official who spoke Friday on condition of anonymity.

Foley resigned abruptly last week amid reports he exchanged sexually suggestive communications with teenage boys who worked as pages on Capitol Hill. Foley's attorney said Foley never engaged in sexual activity with a minor, but that may not matter in certain states.

E-mails and instant messages released so far indicate Foley communicated with boys in California and Louisiana, and may have initiated those contacts from Washington and Florida. The boys in question were all at least 16 at the time.

Under state law in Florida, where the age of consent is 18, a crime may have been committed if Foley is found to have seduced or attempted to seduce a minor.

However, a reading of the law is subjective, said JoAnn Carrin, spokeswoman for the state attorney general's office.

Carrin said the term "seduce" is "open to interpretation." She declined to elaborate on how Foley's communications may have violated state law.

Jeff Harris, president of the Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, said the matter may come down to Foley's intent.

"He may have just gone to the precipice of a cliff but not jumped, which means he didn't commit a crime," Harris said. "If he's encouraging a minor to commit a sex act, I think you've crossed a legal line. Anytime you're talking sexually with a minor on a computer, you're flirting with an arrest."

In Louisiana, it is a felony for an adult to engage in sexually explicit Internet communications with anyone under 17, said Mike Johnson, a special agent with the state attorney general's office.

"It just has to be sexual in nature," Johnson said.

In the District of Columbia, the law is more complex.

It is not illegal for an adult to have sexual relations with a person at least 16 years old, so long as that person is not in a position of authority over the minor. But it is illegal to communicate any sexually related materials to a minor, such as magazines or any printed material, which could include Internet messages, said Jack King, spokesman for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

The District "doesn't have any Internet-related statutes regarding Internet related sexual conduct," King said.

In California, it is illegal to send sexually suggestive communications to a person under 18, said Sandi Gibbons, a spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office.

But Los Angeles criminal defense attorney Mark Geragos said cases are rarely prosecuted if the adult does not at least attempt to meet the child.

"Words alone generally are not going to be enough to prove a crime," Geragos said. "You'd have to have some act in furtherance of the lewd talk."
 

Latest posts

Top