Former U.S. Rep. Mark Foley, Police at Odds Over Computers

[Purveyor]

Source: Associated Press

(08-22) 17:25 PDT West Palm Beach, Fla. (AP) --


Florida's top police agency said Wednesday its investigation into former U.S. Rep. Mark Foley's lurid Internet communications with teenage boys has been hindered because neither Foley nor the House will let investigators examine his congressional computers.


The Florida Department of Law Enforcement says it hopes to conclude its investigation next week. Foley resigned from Congress on Sept. 29 after being confronted with the computer messages he sent to male teenage pages who had worked on Capitol Hill.


"We have requested to review federally owned computers that Mr. Foley used during his time as a representative, but the U.S. House of Representatives ... cited case law restrictions that prohibited them from releasing those computers," said Heather Smith, an FDLE spokeswoman.


Smith said that the House claims the computers are considered congressional work papers, and that only Foley can release them for review.



Read more: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/08/22/national/a172501D99.DTL

[ccpup]

1. are these from the same

computer system the repugs hacked into a few years ago?

[EST]

8. Kind of...On the demicratic side.

Actually, I was thinking there were other computers--not government owned--that had democratic strategy papers on them, which would ostensibly make them DNC computers. I'll take a look--

Here ya go:
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/01/22/infiltration_of_files_seen_as_extensive/

[rodeodance]

9. yup, i recall those dirty tricks

[annabanana]

2. They are the people's computers. I think the House ought

to have the final say, not Foley.

[Purveyor]

3. Sounds like the "House" has had its say...

"U.S. House of Representatives ... cited case law restrictions that prohibited them from releasing those computers"

[KoKo]

5. Don't know if this is a good idea.....Given that Foley was charged

with solicitation shouldn't his computers be open for a criminal investigation? I can understand the House not wanting Law Enforcement rummaging through any House Members computers or files...but if it's a Criminal Investigation and they don't comply ...aren't they being like Bush/Cheney? :shrug:

[rzemanfl]

4. That miserable fuck. He was the original sponsor of the

"Adam Walsh Child Protection Act" that has cops entrapping people all over the country for what that stinking, lying, piece of shit got away with.

[Purveyor]

6. I've long maintained that some of the most active members of groups like 'perverted justice' are

themselves using the organization to gain legitimate access to the worst of the child porn for their own personal pleasure.

I mean, have you ever watched an episode of Dateline on one of their 'predator stings' and observed the members of the 'perverted justice'?

[bobthedrummer]

13. .

:think:

[bobthedrummer]

7. He's not alone, check out this archived thread that was started as a response

to Foley's "resignation".

"The Center for Missing and Exploited Children Board of Directors" (10-1-2006)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2280827

[bobthedrummer]

10. .

[Catherine Vincent]

11. Besides fighting for computers, what is Foley up to nowadays?

Anyone know?

[bobthedrummer]

12. Masturbating while viewing gay porn on computer? He's paid off legal fees with campaign $. Kick.

[bemildred]

14. "law restrictions"? And who makes the laws if not Congress?

That "explanation" is shuck and jive, about as convincing as "the dog made me do it."

[Igel]

15. When Jefferson, Congressman from someplace in Louisiana,

had his office search the Republicans in Congress pitched a fit to defend the Democrat.

It's "legislative privilege". Better to defend somebody in the legislative branch from the 'enemy' party from an investigation by somebody in the *executive* branch than to let precedent be established that *your* computers can be searched.

Now, this search rankled many a DUer. Legislative privilege should have protected his office, even if what was in his filing cabinet were a list of the girls working for him and how much each earned. No matter.

It works the other way, too: Nice dem Congressional leaders having to go on record opposing having the nasty executive branch investigating anything that could possibly weaken their privilege.

Actually, Congress could weaken privilege, but the right of legislative papers and documents to be immune to search and seizure is in the Constitution.

[bemildred]

16. They seem remarkably supine about the usurpation of executive power when it suits them. nt

[bemildred]

17. The important distinction between Mr Jefferson's case, and Mr. Foley's

is that in Mr. Foley's case the legal objection seems intended to stand, and that in Mr. Jefferson's case it never came up, the raid occurred and the results were published immediately. If you consider that the distinction there is the result of accident or coincidence, that is your privilege, but I do not. I consider therefore that the legal objection has no standing as a matter of principle, but only as a convenient excuse when it is needed.