Your Sunday morning Foley scandal roundup:
The Washington Post takes a fine-toothed comb to the different versions of the Foley scandal, as told by GOP leaders. Unsurprising to TPM readers, it snags various inconsistencies:
Gaps and inconsistencies in the public accounts include such basic matters as when House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and his top aides first learned of concerns about Foley’s relationships with male pages, and what they did about it. Also unclear is which GOP officials decided that only two members of the six-person House Page Board should confront the Florida lawmaker.
And accounts differ on whether the two board members knew the exact contents of e-mails Foley sent last year to a teenage boy in Louisiana.
Meanwhile, the LATimes takes a closer look at the “fixers” on House Speaker Dennis Hastert’s (R-IL) staff who were supposed to take care of the Foley problem before it erupted. The “trusted lieutenants” now embroiled in the mess are compared to Richard Nixon’s win-at-all-costs sycophants who squashed political problems for the impeached president:
Today, what this trio of senior aides knew about Foley’s interest in teenage pages and what they did about it may determine whether the story remains a sexual scandal or grows into one of broader deception and coverup, as Hastert’s critics have charged.
Fiercely loyal to the speaker and the Republican Party, veteran aides Scott Palmer, Mike Stokke and Ted Van Der Meid have for years helped Hastert tend to his Republican flock â and protect its members when they run into trouble.
According to several current and former congressional staffers, the group played a central role in the effort to rewrite House rules so then-Majority Leader Tom DeLay could retain his leadership post even if he were indicted. The team also helped engineer the elimination of a congressional subcommittee critical of the cost of a construction project favored by Hastert and others.
Finally, several papers, including the LATimes and the Chicago Tribune, are raising serious questions about whether the House ethics committee is up to the task of investigating the scandal — since it’s done so poorly in the past, and is already showing signs of partisan influence. The Trib uncovers this nugget:
[S]ome Democrats complained Friday about a “strategy session” conference call that [investigative panel member Rep. Judy] Biggert [(R-IL)]reportedly participated in early in the week with other House Republicans about how to deal with the political fallout from the Foley case.
But Biggert said the Monday conference call took place before she knew she’d be part of the subcommittee named to look into the issue, and she also said the call was informational and not political in nature. Biggert, a lawyer, said she can perform her duties like an “officer of the court,” without regard for who has given her political support.
Biggert, of course, was a member of the ethics panel at the time of the call, even though she had not yet been named to the investigative subcommittee.
Further evidence of trouble: the comments of investigative panel chair Rep. Doc Hastings (R-WA), that Hastert has done an “excellent job” handling the Foley mess. Also, Hastert has given nearly $50,000 to GOP members of the ethics panel in the last several years. What, we worry?
