[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Not much going on that I can find today

In Britain, they are secretly preparing for mass deaths

These Are The Best And Worst Countries For Work (US Last Place)-Life Balance

These Are The World's Most Powerful Cars

Doctor: Trump has 6 to 8 Months TO LIVE?!

Whatever Happened to Robert E. Lee's 7 Children

Is the Wailing Wall Actually a Roman Fort?

Israelis Persecute Americans

Israelis SHOCKED The World Hates Them

Ghost Dancers and Democracy: Tucker Carlson

Amalek (Enemies of Israel) 100,000 Views on Bitchute

ICE agents pull screaming illegal immigrant influencer from car after resisting arrest

Aaron Lewis on Being Blacklisted & Why Record Labels Promote Terrible Music

Connecticut Democratic Party Holds Presser To Cry About Libs of TikTok

Trump wants concealed carry in DC.

Chinese 108m Steel Bridge Collapses in 3s, 16 Workers Fall 130m into Yellow River

COVID-19 mRNA-Induced TURBO CANCERS.

Think Tank Urges Dems To Drop These 45 Terms That Turn Off Normies

Man attempts to carjack a New Yorker

Test post re: IRS

How Managers Are Using AI To Hire And Fire People

Israel's Biggest US Donor Now Owns CBS

14 Million Illegals Entered US in 2023: The Cost to Our Nation

American Taxpayers to Cover $3.5 Billion Pentagon Bill for U.S. Munitions Used Defending Israel

The Great Jonny Quest Documentary

This story About IRS Abuse Did Not Post

CDC Data Exposes Surge in Deaths Among Children of Covid-Vaxxed Mothers

This Interview in Munich in 1992 with Gudrun Himmler. (Heinrich Himmler's daughter)

25 STRANGE Wild West Home Features You’ll Never See Again

Zionists DEMAND Megyn Kelly's Head!


Pious Perverts
See other Pious Perverts Articles

Title: Limbaugh defends pedophilia
Source: Libertee Lost
URL Source: [None]
Published: Oct 3, 2006
Author: Mehitable posted it over there without h
Post Date: 2006-10-03 11:32:44 by bluedogtxn
Keywords: None
Views: 1808
Comments: 70

From the October 2 broadcast of The Rush Limbaugh Show:

LIMBAUGH: I'm just thinking out loud here. What if somebody got to the page and said, you know, we want you to set Foley up. We need to do a little titillating thing here. Keep it and save it and so forth. How would you get a kid to do that? Yeah, who knows? You threaten him or pay him. There's any number of ways given the kind of people that we're dealing with and talking about here.

Now, folks, I don't want to be misunderstood here. I'm not trying to mount any kind of a defense. That's a bad word. I'm not trying to get into a defense of what Mark Foley did. Please don't misunderstand. I'm just telling you that the -- the -- the orgy and the orgasm that has been taking place in the media since Friday and with the Democrats is -- it's all coordinated, and it's all -- it's all oriented toward the election. There's no concern about the kid -- no concern about the children.

There is -- there is -- there's not even any real problem with what Foley did, as we've discussed.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 62.

#1. To: All (#0)

We need to do a little titillating thing here. Keep it and save it and so forth. How would you get a kid to do that?

Anyone who can describe a teenage boy as "tittilating" ought to be in prison.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-10-03   11:36:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: bluedogtxn (#1)

Anyone who can describe a teenage boy as "tittilating" ought to be in prison.

Same thing for the CDA that would defend them.

It Is A Republic  posted on  2006-10-03   11:44:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: It Is A Republic (#5)

Same thing for the CDA that would defend them.

Well, I appreciate the sentiment, but this is still the United States of America, and the GOP hasn't quite gotten around to outlawing defense attorneys, reversing the presumption of innocence or doing away with jury trials; but give them time. Your budding little GOP Stalinists will soon have the police state you long for, given time.

bluedogtxn  posted on  2006-10-03   11:57:14 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: bluedogtxn (#10)

There is a difference in trying to get someone a fair trial and trying to get them off on a technicality. Most CDAs are snakes!!!!

It Is A Republic  posted on  2006-10-03   12:06:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: It Is A Republic, bluedogtxn, aristeides, Minerva (#12)

There is a difference in trying to get someone a fair trial and trying to get them off on a technicality. Most CDAs are snakes!!!!

I'm not sure what Foley will be charged with exactly.

Age of consent in DC is 16.

Foley's IM's/email's, while "tittilating" to quote El Rushbow, are not showing Foley to be offering the intern $ for sex.

And as to the issue of sexual harrassment, Foley was not the employer of the interns.

So even though Foley is a disgusting perv with pedophile potential, who deserved to be forced out of Congress, what laws did he break?

I'm playing devil's advocate...

scrapper2  posted on  2006-10-03   12:55:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: scrapper2 (#30) (Edited)

Age of consent in DC is 16.

Foley's IM's/email's, while "tittilating" to quote El Rushbow, are not showing Foley to be offering the intern $ for sex.

And as to the issue of sexual harrassment, Foley was not the employer of the interns.

Utterly irrelevant. This is what FR is pushing out now.

Foley was soliciting sex with a minor on the internet under the applicable Federal Law. Foley was the acting supervisor of the intern. Money for sex is just another red herring from FreeRepublic. If you solicit a kid for sex, it is not necessary for money to change hands to support the charge.

Minerva  posted on  2006-10-03   12:59:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: Minerva (#31)

Utterly irrelevant. This is what FR is pushing out now.

Foley was soliciting sex with a minor on the internet under the applicable Federal Law. Foley was the acting supervisor of the intern. Money for sex is just another red herring from FreeRepublic. If you solicit a kid for sex, it is not necessary for money to change hands to support the charge.

I am not sure what FR "is pushing."

I was simply being curious about what charges a federal prosecutor could level against Foley and win in court.

a) Was Foley actually soliciting sex from a minor on the internet?

I'll grant you that Foley made some very suggestive lurid comments, but did Foley actually "solicit sex?"

In one case - as listed in this article - even the parents of the page did not want any action taken against Foley at the time. And the kid involved thought the communications from Foley were "creepy" but that was the extent of it.

b) This July the FBI received copies of the emails that Foley sent the Louisiana teenager in 2005 but the FBI chose NOT to pursue an investigation. Why do you think the FBI would not jump on this??? - perhaps because there was not enough evidence re: any crime being committed???

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp- dyn/content/article/2006/10/02/AR2006100200333.html

"FBI Knew in July About Foley E-Mails to Teen" October 03, 2006 Washington Post

"...The FBI acknowledged yesterday that it did not begin an investigation in late July after receiving copies of e-mails sent in 2005 by then-Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) to a Louisiana teenager..."

c) Foley was not an "acting supervisor" of the interns. Where did you read that to be the case?

d) Get your self-righteous shorts un-twisted. I am not a mindless freetard. I am not defending Foley's actions. I am only "putting out there" the possibility that it will be hard to prosecute Foley on any criminal charges and win. And this will not be because a wiley CDA is using technicalities to get Foley off. It may be that Foley's actions, while reprehensible, are not breaking any laws. Kapeesh?

scrapper2  posted on  2006-10-03   13:35:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#62. To: scrapper2 (#40)

This July the FBI received copies of the emails that Foley sent the Louisiana teenager in 2005 but the FBI chose NOT to pursue an investigation. Why do you think the FBI would not jump on this??? - perhaps because there was not enough evidence re: any crime being committed???

We have a justice department headed by an AG who says torture is cool (as long as you call it something else), that junior don't need no steeenking warrants, and is now telling judges not to cross the white house...and you think he can't spike an FBI investigation into one of their own?!

Am I cynical...you're damned skippy I am. But when dealing with this crowd if you're not cynical, you simply aren't paying attention.

orangedog  posted on  2006-10-03   16:06:46 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 62.

        There are no replies to Comment # 62.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 62.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]