Hastert: Resign or Stick With Him?

Wait and find out the facts...and then if he is guilty, then not only should he resign, but he should also go to prison just like Cardinal Conner should have.

Joseph Botwinick

 

I think the facts are already out there that Hastert knew stuff before and could have done more than cover it up.

I think he should resign. But politics being what it is, some will hope that he does not resign.

Christians who support the Republican party and think it can represent them should understand that politics is not moral - it's all about compromise and power.

 

I haven't kept up with this story, but what law is Congressman Foley supposed to have broken. I understand he wrote some awful emails and needed to resign but I haven't heard anyone state what law he broke.

Can someone bring me up to speed?

 

The premise of the poll question is premature. According to the reports I've seen, the IMs, which were much more explicit than the e-mails, only came to light in the last few days. Prior to that, all Hastert and the rest of the leadership had seen was the e-mails, the most questionable of which involved a request for a photo. Apparently Foley had been confronted about the e-mails and told that they needed to stop, and Hastert thought that the matter had been resolved. This was clearly a mistake, but not nearly as bad a mistake as knowing the guy was a full-blown pervert and not doing anything. Unless evidence emerges that this was the case, calls for Hastert's resignation are an overreaction. And of course, calls for his resignation at this point from Democrats are just more election year insincerity, given how many equal or worse infractions by fellow Democrats they have excused completely over the years.
Joseph is right. We can't judge the case before we have all the facts.

 

I voted no simply because your premise is false.

All that is known is that Hastert's staffers were made aware that Foley had sent an IM to a page and the page's parents felt the contact was inappropriate, but at the same time, they didn't want to pursue the matter farther than having Foley cease contact with them.

How can you claim, based on this information, that Hastert is behind some right wing cover-up and should resign as Speaker?

From what I can see thus far, it appears that the leadership in the House did not know the truth about Foley's actions.

What they did know, his being "overly friendly" with a page, is a far cry from what they didn't know, his asking a page to "do things" with him.

If you can't see a difference in the 2, then you are in trouble.

People can be seemingly be "overly friendly" while actually having no ill intentions. The House leadership asked Foley to stop contact with the page, at the request of the parents, and the matter was not pursued any further, also at the request of the parents, because, at the time, there was no need to suspect any real wrong doing.

If I am proven wrong in the future, then there needs to be a shake up in the leadership, but as of now, based on the information currently available, you have no right to say that Hastert was covering up for Foley or that those of us who support the Speaker are compromising our values/morals in supporting him at this time.

 

Yes, Hastert should resign. If an adult even suspects that a chlid is endangered, he or she is obligated by law to report it.

And Hastert had a lot more than suspiciion to go on.

 

The laws on obligatory reporting can vary from state to state, can they not? Most states require teachers, clergy, social workers, and child-care providers to report suspected physical activity, but I'm not sure how this applies to Mr. Hastert. Obviously, morally you'd want to be responsible and report in a timely way, but I'm not sure if he would fall under a legal honus.

I think we can save the pollster some time. The Dems on this board will think Hastert should resign immediately. The GOP folks will likely say he should not unless shown directly culpable by a nonpartisan agent. I'm curious as to whether the Dems would want a speaker Boehner, who seems to be more of a firebrand than Hastert.

 

Galatian,

You don't know that to be the case. Hastert has continually said that he had no idea about the extent of Foley's actions.

All that was known was that a parent felt uncomfortable with Foley sending emails to their son and asked the leadership to have him stop. That was done, and nothing further appeared to be amiss until just recently.

Maybe it's just my nature, but I don't tend to assume that someone is a child molester just because they have email contact with someone who is underage. It could be a dangerous thing to bring such charges against someone solely with the "evidence" presented at that time, especially a Congressman. Hindsight is 20/20.

I would bet most of us here, had this occured in our church, would not have thought anything more going on than what was presented to and determined by the House leadership in this instance.

I think people are looking for any excuse to damage the GOP leadership right now.

 

Questions are kindof loaded . . .

 

There is no reason for Hastert to resign at this time.

House precedent set during other administrations over sex related scandals seems to have ruled out his resignation.

 

In fact, others in the GOP leadership said that he did.

If you send an "overly friendly" email to my teenager, you better hope I don't find out where you live.

What could anyone do to them that would be worse than that which they've brought onto themselves?

 

And of course, anyone who agrees with you must be telling the truth, because as we all know, you know everything.

Why not wait and find out what happened? Are you worried that Hastert might be proven correct, and you will lose your chance to bash a Republican?

 

Not to excuse Foley's irreparable behaviour but according to DRUDGE [link]the "child" was over 18.

Rob

 

It is a little early to say resign. It is kind of a mute point anyhow. This Congress is basically over. This is October, and when Congress starts to work in reality again in January, there will more than likely be a democratic speaker. What difference does three months make when Congress is not in session?

 

Under DC's age of consent law...one only has to reach the age of 16 to engage in physical sex.

That is one reason why the Congressmen, one Republican and one Democrat, back in 1983 were never charged when their affairs with Pages were brought to light. One was 16 and one was 17...both said it was consensual.

 

:tonofbricks:You noticed that too? And I thought I was the only one who saw that bus rolling along!

Ed

 

As a matter of fact , I wouldn't. I have not commented on Foley or his behavior.

As you well know, since you started it, the subject of this thread is Hastert.

Why would you lead it astray to insult another member?

 

Foley is NOT a pro-lifer, he is pro-choice and a member of The Republican Majority For Choice. In fact there is nothing moral about him, it has been known for quite a few years now that he is a homosexual who supports strict sentencing for hate crimes. The GOP should be glad to be finally rid of him!