« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Are House Democrats Covering Up Crimes?

Some Questions About Tim Mahoney

House Democrats have washed their hands of Congressman Tim Mahoney (D-FL) as quickly as their Republican predecessors disowned Mark Foley (R-FL). But where Denis Hastert, John Boehner and other Republican leaders were hounded by questions about what they knew of the Foley matter, the press is giving Nancy Pelosi, Rahm Emanuel, Chris Van Hollen and others a free ride.

According to Congressman Mahoney, he spoke to Rahm Emanuel about having an affair with a member of his staff early in 2007:

Mahoney said he was confronted by influential U.S. Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., in early 2007 about rumors he was having an affair with a staffer.

“He said, ‘If that’s the case, stop it,’ ” Mahoney recalled. Emanuel, head of the House Democratic Caucus, is the former head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and recruited Mahoney to run against Foley.

Asked why he didn’t heed Emanuel’s advice, Mahoney said, “The relationship at that point in time was intermittent and we needed to finish the transition (as a new member of Congress) and she was part of that.”

A few months later, Allen left Mahoney’s congressional office for his campaign staff. The transfer was not related to their affair or rumors about it, Mahoney said.

This confirms my suspicion (expressed a few days ago), but it conflicts with what Emanuel has said. His staff told ABC that he only just learned that Mahoney’s paramour was on the Congressional payroll. What did Emanuel know, and when did he know it? And what advice did he give to Mahoney?

Further, Emanuel had recruited Mahoney to run for Congress and maintained an interest in him. But Chris Van Hollen was working with Mahoney on his re-election campaign, in his capacity as Chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. When did he learn about this violation of House ethics rules, and did he or Emanuel discuss it with Congressional leaders? Van Hollen’s DCCC dropped its advertising in Mahoney’s district days before Democrats say they learned of Mahoney’s behavior. If this is true, what prompted their decision to abandon Mahoney?

There are plenty of other questions that ought to be posed to Emanuel and other House Democratic leaders. Among them:

Tim Mahoney promised Patricia Allen a job at his campaign’s advertising firm. Were Emanuel, Van Hollen, or other Democratic leaders involved in extending this offer?

Mahoney secured earmarks for Martin County, Florida, while having an affair with a county representative. Was Appropriations Committee Chairman Obey aware of Mahoney’s behavior, or were other Democratic leaders?

Did Speaker Pelosi, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, Whip Jim Clyburn, Rep. Emanuel, or Rep. Van Hollen see the letter that Ms. Patricia Allen’s attorney sent to Rep. Mahoney alleging sexual harassment? Did Rep. Mahoney or his staff share the letter with anyone? With whom did Rep. Mahoney share the letter?

Two years ago, the mainstream media hounded House leaders to find out what they knew of Mark Foley’s inappropriate behavior with House pages. Now however, they are content to ignore the illegal activities of Foley’s successor. It’s almost enough to make you think there’s a double standard.

COMMENTS

  • kappy249

    Oprah Was Right

    When She Stated That Barack Hussein Obama Was The One

    The one who voted to raise your taxes.

    The one who voted to kill commits genocide against our babies

    The one who voted to fund groups who commit crimes against our country with your tax dollars
    The one who wants to raise the capitol gains tax so that Evan Joe six-pack will have less to take home from his 401k or retirement plans

    The one who lies about his associations?

    The one who wants to spread your wealth around

    WHO IS THIS MAN

    Barack Hussein Obama

    He Is The One You Don?t Want To Vote For On Election Day

    This Advertisement was not paid for

  • awtherfrd

    n/t

  • manfromok

    Listen, of course they’re not going to broadcast it, and it’s par for the course for those guys.

    But carousing with underage (or barely legal) male congressional interns repeatedly isn’t quite the same as your garden variety affair.

    In any case, those people in Florida need to cast their votes with a little more thought…c’mon…what is IN THE WATER there?

    • Mike_Dugas

      …too many *#$^%@ yankees.

      Wish they’d have followed the RedSox home!=)

      OK ok I know…..we like their money but basically the vote blue.

      Go Rays!

      • Grim

        …..and the media won’t report it, is it still a crime?

        Grim

        • mbecker908

          .

  • THE_RED_REBEL

    And then when called on to explain- stare blankly at you like you just exposed your red panties to the Pope.

  • olderthangandalf

    Congressmen and Senators having affairs happens every single day. Even if you limit to affairs with federally paid staff, it’s not an uncommon occurrence. Infidelity and seeking public office go hand in hand; both are ways to boost your ego by winning the approval of others. On top of that, politicians work brutal hours away from home and with their staff; that provides an environment where things can and do happen.

    Congressmen hitting on underage pages of the same sex – well, that’s a little different.

    Following the old tradition of “it’s not news if a dog bites a man, but it’s news if a man bites a dog” a garden variety heterosexual affair isn’t being treated quite the same as the Foley situation. In fairness, this affair is getting plenty of coverage and will cost this chump his seat.

    There seem to be levels of sex scandals. If it involves minors, and especially minors of the opposite sex, it’s radioactive. If it involves an exchange of large amounts of cash, it has the potential to go radioactive, depending on whether it is old news (Vitter) or fresh news applying to a holier than thou type (Spitzer). If it is a garden variety affair, it’s business as usual in DC.

    If anything, this affair is getting more than the usual amount of attention. That’s in part because it hit during the middle of a close political campaign, and in larger part because everybody in DC, Republican and Democrat, seems to hate Mahoney.

  • ed_ga

    I know no person with a room temp IQ is
    surpised the MSN will not cover a Dem sex scandal.

    • THE_RED_REBEL

      I’VE HAD IT!! If one more person asks what’s in the water in Florida, I’m going to throw my vote to The One and move south OF TALLAHASSEE where the water IS blue!

      BTW- will you please render those that hail from the great Red Sunshine State and are fellow redstaters an apology when WE DO BRING A WIN??

      I’ll thank you in advance.

      Sincerely,
      Liberty Penn Justice

      GO RAYS!

      • NohOne

        Foley was not found to not have comitted a crime as the person he was sending the messages to was over the age of 18.

        But there is a difference in how Dems treat something another Dem does, and what a Republican does. A comparison can be made with Mark Foley, Gerry Studds, Larry Craig, Trent Lott, Strom Thurmond, John Kerry, and Ted Kennedy.

        Gerry Studds admitted to an affair with an underage (17) boy, he was censured but continued to serve in the senate. Foley sent text messages to a man (18 or older), he is driven out of office and they try to take down the Republican leadership with him.

        Trent Lott gives a tribute to Strom Thurmond, and he is driven out of his office leadership. A month after the Foley “scandal” broke, Kennedy and Kerry give a tribute to a Studds because of his death – somebody who comitted an actual crime – saying he was a great man, and nothing happens to him.

        Larry Craig is in a bathroom stall – not making any claims as to if he did/did not try to solicit – and he is driven out. Meanwhile, a pedophile is given a slap on the wrist, and stays in the senate. A now former President is having an affair with

        I am not saying that what Foley/Craig did was a good thing, but those two were demonized, and still are fodder for late-night talk shows. What Lott said was not good, but was destroyed for it. But when a Dem says something they should not have, or does something worse, it is perfectly fine, and they continue on with their actions without repercussions. Even Obama has dome it – he used Ryan’s sexual life against him to drive him out of the race, getting the courts to open divorce filings. But John Kerry refused to open his divorce filings, and even fought against people trying to get ahold of those records.

        Do you suppose if a Republican was sleeping with someone from Fannie May/Freddie Mac, or has a boyfriend running a prostitution ring out of their appartment, that the Democrats would just say “that is their personal life, let it be?” No, they would not let it go, and they would run a scorched-earth campaign to destroy every Republican they can find.

        • misterlivingston

          I seem to recall a little incident involving one Eliot Spitzer.

          • olderthangandalf

            1) The Dems have cut Mahoney loose. He’s going to lose the election, and we will never hear of him again. If you hear the DNC or House Democrats are sending him money, raise the alarm, but I think they’ve cut and run. Truth is, I think even before this scandal they were conflicted as to whether they preferred Mahoney or a Republican as he is reputed to be a major jerk, sex aside.

            2) Studds is ancient history. Sleazy ancient history, but ancient history.

            3) What Foley did was indefensible. If you want to say it was ok, those are your values, but I think when people send children to Congress to be pages, they deserve better than what Foley served up. The Republican leadership was on the hook because they knew Foley was a predator preying on minors entrusted to their care, and they didn’t do their duty to protect the kids. Some things ought to be beyond politics.

            4) Obama had nothing to do with Ryan’s sex scandal. The whistle was blown by one of Ryan’s Republican primary opponents. It was followed up on by the press. Obama just stood by, presumably wondering if he is indeed the luckiest man on earth as the Illinois GOP totally self destructed.

            5) You left out Barney Frank tolerating a gay bordello in his own dwelling. If there is a case where a Dem skated, that would be the one, but then again it was Massachusetts.

            Both parties claim that only their sex scandals get covered. That’s booshwa. Tell it to Elliot Spitzer. It all depends on what other news is competing for airtime or column space, and just how juicy and unexpected it is.

  • NohOne

    1) They cut him loose, but they have not tried to destroy him like Dems have to the other side of the isle.

    2) I was making comparisons to how one side is treated but the other is left off the hook. It is history, one that was brought up by Dems not too long ago and nothing was said about them.

    3) I am not saying it was OK. If I were to do what he did at work, I would have been fired for sexual harassment (which reminds me of another person who had an intern…). But it is two people of legal age. Foley should be held responsible for sexual harassment, but it is not the same as a person doing it to somebody underage. As for mommy & daddy sending little Jimmy (generic name) off to the big bad world, he was of age. Nobody should be subjected to that. But to say that Foley was wrong, while Studds was years ago so he gets a pass is the very point I was making.

    4) My understanding was different, but I thought it was his surrogates who caused the issue; but I am willing to concede the point.

    5) That is exactly what I said in my last comment – “has a boyfriend running a prostitution ring out of their appartment”

    Both parties have their scandals covered, but if it is a Republican, then they are dragged through the mud and are ultimately destroyed. If it is a Dem, then they are are quietly exposed in the media, and quickly droppped. A Republican is secretly gay, then we need to make sure they are exposed for everyone to see. A Republican is taking a what coould be a questionable “bribe” (Stevens), destroy them. A Dem does the same (Jefferson, La) and uses federal money to retrieve his bribe money from the freezer while people are dying in NO, well, it is not that big a deal, is it?