MELTDOWNBLOG

SCANDAL IN THE HOUSE?

Salacious scandal is a facet of political life that the “Party bosses” would rather did not happen but it does and with a sometimes alarming regularity. The “Scandal hunters” of the press are usually easily disposed to make public anything that might sell a newspaper or increase circulation however briefly. It is unusual to say the least when a very public figure manages to circumvent the efforts of the press to satisfy the “Public’s right to know” as they put it whenever they are challenged but one such case did happen and went almost unnoticed until one of the parties to the liaison made it public knowledge. The case involved a British Prime Minister and a four-year heterosexual affair with a fellow MP whilst they were serving the country at Westminster. [Both were adulterers] Though the affair took place several years before the story “Broke” it was still a shock because it came as a revelation that was totally missed by a press that seemed “Hell bent” on bringing down a government. The Prime Minister in question was once described by an opponent as “The man who ran away from the circus to become an accountant”. He was always regarded as dull, ordinary and not very adventurous but the revelation left the press open mouthed that no one had even guessed that there was a scandal in his past and his mistress was equally untainted by a hint of scandal up to that point though they were both high profile figures within the government. They were exponents of the long forgotten quality of discretion up until a time when one of the two parties involved published the facts of the affair in a book.
Yet in this case it was the press who felt excluded from what could have been the final Nemesis of a particular government.

Nearly ten years later saw two stories hit the presses at the same time that could be said to be “Scandalous” both involved politics though one story was on the front page in the UK whilst the other was being discussed in the corridors of power on the other side of the Atlantic in the USA. Both involved prominent politicians with tendencies toward the unwholesome attributes of a homosexual nature or perhaps in the US case paedophilia.

The UK story became common knowledge in January 2006 and indirectly involved the forthcoming leadership battle for the smaller of the three main political parties, The Liberal Democratic Party.

The Liberal Democrat Leader at the time was Charles Kennedy who quit the post citing his addiction to alcohol as the reason for his resignation. The leadership of the party was up for “grabs” and became a four-corner contest between Sir Menzies Campbell, Simon Hughes, Chris Hulme and Mark Oaten.

Mark Oaten was the sitting Member of Parliament for Winchester and the Liberal Democrat spokesman for home affairs. The contest was reduced to a three cornered fight only two weeks in when Mark Oaten suddenly withdrew his intention to stand for the leadership giving the reason as “A lack of popular support”. He claimed to have no knowledge of an “Expose`” which was to be published in a tabloid newspaper the following Sunday but his withdrawal did take much of the “Sting” from the story when it was published and to some extent spared the party further embarrassment.
The “Story” was that Mark Oaten had been involved in a homosexual relationship with what is known as a “Rent boy”. An arrangement where young homosexual men sell their favours to generally much older patrons. In this case the “Rent boy” was 23 whilst the patron was 41. The boy faced with the loss of a lucrative relationship was said to have “Sold his story to the press” and claimed that the relationship had lasted some 18 months.

The elements of politics, an improper relationship and alcohol hovering in the background of the story are not unique as a similar story is now unfolding in the US though it was common knowledge within certain circles shortly before the Oaten story became widely known.

The US case involved a Congressman, a computer and a “House Page”. A Page is a young person employed to answer the phone, carry messages, deliver documents and generally help out by doing errands for Congressmen. The employment of Pages holds a trust, which is implicit in Congress, a trust that should never under any circumstance be violated.
The matter, which is now under investigation by the FBI, alleges that a page who was 16 during the summer of 2005 received emails of an “Improper nature” from a Congressman, Mark Foley. [Member for West Palm Beach, Florida for 12 years]. The Congressman resigned last week amid a storm of controversy in the House of Representatives. Mr Foley was co-chairman of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children’s Caucasus and an advocate for the protection of children upon the Internet. His activities with the unnamed 16-year-old page called to question his suitability to work closely with children and it was feared that the inappropriate conversations and the email contact with the page were not isolated incidents.
In the past he instigated a legislative purge that pushed the FBI to open a sex offenders database, which is now used in part to facilitate “Megan’s law” and regulated Internet sites posting photographs of children for the gratification of paedophiles worldwide and he tried to force the more sexually explicit sites to label themselves to that effect. Yet transcripts of his conversations online with at least two other minors indicate that the intention of the originator was by nature sexual. The fear that the Louisiana incident was not unique was given credence by two other cases coming to light all originating from the board name Maf54.One was a teenage boy in San Diego, California where a meeting had been arranged and another involving a teenage boy in the immediate area of Washington D.C. where a future meeting was said to be planned.
In the UK not long ago a law forbidding the activities of “Grooming” came to the statute books so that action could be taken against such people, similar legislation came into force in the states including “The Child Modelling Exploitation Prevention Act” a bill sponsored by Foley yet in asking the 16 year old page for a photograph of himself that was the piece of legislation that opened the floodgates to his exposure.
When the allegations came to light in the closing months of 2005 The House of Representatives Ethic Committee investigated briefly and issued a warning to Foley but none of the details were made known much to the abhorrence of many of those who knew of the investigation. It was felt that the matter should have been passed to the FBI for a full enquiry. One fact however was certain, the circle of “Those who knew of the matter” would have included The Ethics/Standards Committee, The Speaker of the House, The leaders of both sides of the House and their Aides and a large slice of the Republican party machine yet a warning was deemed to be the appropriate action to take though some feared that the matter was the tip of an iceberg.

The matter lay obscured by protocols and House procedure for almost 11 months
but the most recent of Mr. Foley’s emails to the 16-year-old page from Louisiana fanned the embers that caused it to re-ignite at the start of last week. By the Friday last week Foley had resigned and checked into a clinic known for its treatment of alcohol abuse in Florida, it was thought to be a device to delay the FBI investigation because whilst he was in their care he could avoid the searching questions of investigators.
Today, through his lawyer David Roth a statement disclosed that Foley was abused as a teenager by a clergyman [the cleric was not named] The 52 year old ex congressman also asserted that he was a homosexual but had never had any sexual contact with a minor. The statement goes on to deny any allegation of paedophilia at any time.

Beneath this mix of allegation, denial and pending investigation is perhaps the main reason why this affair has surfaced to put the Republican party upon the rack at this particular time, in five weeks time on November 7th there is an election and the damage that this affair could do is worth votes and seats in the House. The Democrats in the House maintain that the Speaker Dennis Hastert should resign for his lack of judgement in dealing with the affair in the first instance and further assert that the Democrats should have been kept informed. But, an interview with a former Page named as Blake Yocum reveals, “Foley’s interest in the young as legendary and many of the Pages suspected that Foley was homosexual but the thought that he might also have had paedophile tendencies had not been considered”.

The House of Representatives is one of the places in America where “Smart” is supposed to hold court, the Pages are essentially little more than children yet the House maintains that “They did not know about Foley’s unhealthy interest in the Pages” who in their time must have had contact with Congressmen on both sides of the House and they missed what any 16 year old could plainly see? The question, it would seem is “Are the right people elected to Congress”? For the House to maintain that they did not know is unbelievable.

The FBI will surely ask the question, “What did they know and when did they know it” The inescapable conclusion is that many Congressmen knew about it a long time ago and did nothing until it was politically expedient to act. The casualties were the Pages; some Congressmen knew the dangers awaiting them every time they sent a document by hand. “All that is required for evil to flourish is that good men do nothing”

Three scandals of varying degree, all now public knowledge one the press missed completely, one they were too late to exploit fully and one that should have been headline news almost a year ago.

JP.

Posted: October 4, 2006 , Modified: October 4, 2006

Comment Here

Excellent Good Average Poor Bad

Comments

Email Address
(Optional)

[Last 100 Blogs] [Blog Search] [Contact Us] [FREE Site] [Home] [Writers] [Login]