The best run down is over at Rich’s. For now, that’s the status of the story unless something else pops.
UPDATE: In trying to make this as clear as possible, here’s what I can tell you–mainly similar to what I’ve said in comments.
The rumor popped up the Monday or Tuesday after the Foley story broke. It circulated a bit amongst bloggers and I imagine the MSM. No one took it too seriously because there wasn’t any evidence or sign that it was coming out. So it stayed in the background, people checking out the story and generally not being much different than a number of rumors out there involving all sorts of Illinois politicians.
Then since Tuesday the noise got louder, with a crescendo yesterday, but not only that but three confirming bits of information that something was going to pop:
1) identifying information to the young girl involved
2) completely unrelated sources–so the likelihood of rumors emanating from a single source was low to non-existent
3) confirmation that press organizations were circling the story (also true) and asking different people for background and comments and such
Now, that led to crossing paths with the Kos diaries which I generally tried not to do because it went further than I thought it should.
However, this morning I got another independent confirmation on with two and three. And the sources largely didn’t have much at stake in the rumor being true or not. Some had nothing at stake.
The information as I understand it didn’t just come from press, but actually from Congress in a form. What I’m guessing is that the press was overstating what they had in hand while seeking further information.
If it is false, then it was incredibly widespread–and more than just a malicious rumor by some political operative. Specific elements as mentioned by Rich are false and probably coming from one place (well except the web site thing which I deleted or tried to delete in comments) However, I am also acutely aware that the issue is still being followed up by members of the press. This isn’t meant to be contrite, it’s meant to tell you as closely as I can what’s up with the story and where it may/may not go.
If the rumor is false, we all owe him an apology. The ones who leaked this out originally should be exposed as well. I want crooked GOPers exposed, but for what they did, not for false allegations.
That photo the news folks are running of this congress member and Foley are encouraging the rumor building. Either they think it’s true or not, but they are building the momentum on it with actions like that.
Give it some time—whomever is lying–and someone is–it’ll come out.
If that is the “best run down” of the story, well, then we are FAR away from what you were talking about yesterday.
That run down suggests the rumor is 100% false. Are you backing away from what you’ve posted?
trifecta, you are right.
If Republicans had spread such a false rumor, you’d be b*tching a blue streak about Karl Rove and his dastardbly tactics.
The linked page you referenced involved Rich finding out if the rumor was true solely from the congressman’s spokesman. It may just be a rumor, but you certainly would not be able to determine that solely through convervations with the congressman’s spokesperson. So i guess its just a wait and see.
trifecta, you are right.
If Republicans had spread such a false rumor, you’d be b*tching a blue streak about Karl Rove and his dastardly tactics.
That is true. Taking their word for it is not exactly obvious. They lie about just about everything. Witness Foley, and the who told who what lies, backtracks, etc…
If false, I am sorry I helped spread it. If true, it would not shock me in the least.
“It may just be a rumor, but you certainly would not be able to determine that solely through convervations with the congressman’s spokesperson.”
Perhaps you are right, but a rumor also doesn’t verify itself – and the rumor itself is all that the commenters were basing their statements on.
I wouldn’t characterize Rich’s post as saying the rumor is 100% false. It shoots down two rumors I’d not really heard until I posted that he was in hiding and planning on resigning and that the web site was down until it appeared in comments.
Right now, I’d say there is more to come. I can say that if someone is spreading a false rumor there is some frustration overall about that and it will be pursued. However, the story is not dead by any means. I’d suggest that in the next 36 hours we’ll have an answer and from what I understand there’s still a story there.
I think I can safely say there are more than a couple sources where this is coming from so I think were I disagree with what is said over at Rich’s, it’s that this wasn’t the work of one person or group. It’s coming from completely unrelated sourcing. Whether Rich and I are talking to completely different people is hard to tell
===and the rumor itself is all that the commenters were basing their statements on
Two things–hence no names here yet and there is more than a rumor that the story is being investigated–there are details being tracked down. They could be wrong and then he deserves full exhoneration–but it isn’t only amorphous rumors.
I thanked you in your last post, I take it back. seems like we’ve all been screwed here. Thanks for nothing. I just discovered this blog and thought that I found a good, reliable place. I was wrong. Buh Bye!
the real tragedy here is that there is a real person’s name attached to this rumor, and, no, i’m not speaking of the congressman. i recall the real emotional toll that the woman (and her fiance) who was falsely charged by drudge of having an affair with Kerry had to endure.
If the rumor proves true, it proves true, but Wonkette really should be ashamed.
So if this rumor is false, will Kos and other liberal bloggers start looking at Harry Reid?
Show us where there’s anything worthwhile to look at in Harry Reid’s direction. The LLC story was much ado about nothing and he deserves an apology from the AP reporter who has tried repeatedly to taint him.
i agree as well that names should not be divulged until the sourcing is determined which seems impossible these days….it is wrong….
that said…yes I agree with Grand old partisan that the accused should not have to prove a rumor, which is just a rumor as false….my only point was that Rich, from his post, was basing all of his own opinions (at least what he was referencing), since he said he was tired of waiting to find out something, on his contact with the congressman’s spokesperson. He then went on to say that he had significant doubts about it. Well, based on what he referenced, ie the campaign people of the congressman, that would not be the source that would give me doubts.
Harry Reid: much ado about nothing?
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/politics/4266054.html
Hamburglar,
Them’s pretty small potatoes. So he gave Christmas bonuses to the doorman and other staff of a building that he owns. He’s come clean and reimbursed his campaign fund for the whole $3,300. Meanwhile, on the other side, we’ve got convicted criminals still serving in congress. No comparison.
That damn — if only he’d been accused of having sex with a MALE page like Gerry Studds, (D-Mass) he would coast to reelection and receive kudos from Democrats. And voters like NWBurbs would throw their support behind Weller in the interest of “checks and balances”).
If there is ever a pile of shit on the gound the Democrats are sure to step in it. You just keep your fingers crossed that did do something so dastardly and then harrumph around and act all indignant… It seems to be the only way your candidates can close the numbers gap.
as my grandpappy used to say, “patience jackass patience”.
Well, if we’re going to talk about politicans and shady land deals, then let’s talk about Denny Hastert’s. Given that Denny Hastert made a higher profit and higher returns than Harry Reid, and, unlike Harry Reid, and authored an earmark that directly raised the value of his proprety, I think Democrats would welcome the comparison.
http://www.tnr.com/user/nregi.mhtml?i=w061002&s=lillyornstein100606
What’s that smell? Hey, AnonymousPundit, have you checked the bottom of your shoe lately?
I don’t know about Illinois, but elsewhere, our candidates are not interested in closing numbers gaps. They’re after widening their leads.
YO ADRIAN — you just found this place … but don’t leave now. This is high-level kook central, not the major leagues mind you like the democraticunderground or The Nation, but certainly AAA level. The proprietor is fairly level-headed but some of the other postings are real tin-foil-hat-crowd kind of stuff.
I’m finding the comments more amusing by the moment. And thanks Citation. I think…
Arch –
I think it’s worth noting that Shearer and Weller are putting their names and reputations on the line with such a clear, unambigious denial; which is more than can be said of the anonymous person(s) who started and are fueling this rumor.
Just saying.
Well, it’s really brave of Weller to deny the charges grand old partisan. I mean, if he is lying, they will be upset about the lying too then?
His reputation will be his least concern if the stories are true. The fact that he is denying it doesn’t impress me. Bob Ney and Duke Cunningham denied their crookedness to their own fellow Republican house members. That’s not what they are remembered for, but for the crimes.
===than can be said of the anonymous person(s) who started and are fueling this rumor.
Where the initial start of this came from is over two weeks old–I’ve been hearing it for some time. Now, I didn’t give it much credence and still have a healthy respect for what may/may not be involved. That said, it’s certainly true that this is being widely investigated and that’s when I posted. If there is nothing after everything is clear, I’ll make that abundantly clear personally.
In one particular case, I think there may be some identification of who pushed particular rumors along with the story. The story is so broadly circulated, but I think Rich’s post makes clear that certain aspects were certainly wrong. If this does fall apart, I think you’ll hear about that portion.
I doubt very seriously whether it is untrue. I worked for the House during the 1980’s and Weller was a well known “creep.”
There may not be enough evidence to prove it, but I don’t think it’s untrue.
Besides, the guy’s married to a Nazi? What does he have to do to convince you he’s a bastard?
trifectia,
and just what will happen to whever started the rumor – if and when they are even ever found (and Arch’s notion that even those who would have liked this rumor to be true will be upset enough to help find and punish them is as laughable as OJ’s search for the real killers)? What do they have to lose by lying?
What does it say about some of the commenters here that they are willing to give nameless, faceless gossips with nothing to lose by spreading lies the benefit of the doubt over an elected official who goes on the record to defend his name and honor? The Congressman is certainly showing more courage than the rumor-mongers, here and elsewhere.
Last time I checked, in this country you were innocent until proven guilty – not the other way around. So why are so many of you taking the position that we shouldn’t assume Weller’s innocent until it is conclusively proven. Why should Weller be expected to conclusively disprove an ambiguous rumor that no one is willing to take credit for before he can reclaim his good name?
===Arch’s notion that even those who would have liked this rumor to be true
Not so much as that as some people think they were being used…Not in relation to what was told to me, but what else that was out there and is obviously false.
Arch – what were you told, and by whom?
I’ll take the word of a man willing to put his name on the line over vague rumors passed on by anonymous bloggers any day of the week.
You and Wonkette (her more so) should be ashamed of yourselves for fueling a rumor that you know will hurt the Congressman even if there is iron clad, DNA evidence proving it’s false.
David Corn:
Former Clerk of the House Jeff Trandahl has told the House ethics committee about two Republican House members who had sex with congressional pages, and neither man is page-chaser Mark Foley. That’s the rumor circulating in Washington. One of these Republicans supposedly had sex with a male page; one with a female page. The names of the implicated Republicans are on the rumor-mill, but I’m not going to disclose these identities
http://www.davidcorn.com/archives/2006/10/webb_and_the_po.php
What are you talking about grand old partisan?
Nobody is saying that Weller is necessarily guilty (other than whoever started the rumors). Just that he and his spokesperson could be expected to deny the charges whether they are true or false. In other words, the denial doesn’t shed a whole lot of light on the accuracy of the rumors.
As far as I’m concerned, I assume the rumors are false unless some sort of evidence is presented demonstrating otherwise.
First of all —
Sure, there have been plenty of rumors mentioning Weller by name… but Frankly, after GOP Congressman Fitzpatrick accused DEMs of being behind the Foley scandal, then when Wolf Blitzer pushed him on proof — said “Do you have any proof they WEREN’T involved”… well…. the GOP shelved any decorum rules long ago. I understand there should be something called principles – and absolutely, if someone — a Kos diarist, Wonkette, Arch — anyone, just pulled Weller’s name out of a hat and started accusin’, they should be called to the mat. But that said — long before MOveOn ad contests, Rush — presented an award by the GOP congress — was using terms like “feminazi” and “Hitlery”. The rules of decorum were long since tossed out the window, and I hardly think the whole left owes anyone any sort of apology at this point and time. We’re not in a Marquis of Queensbury boxing match here — the GOP has been fighting a street fight for more than a decade. I don’t like “sinking to their level” either… but I certainly don’t like losing elections – and we’ve reached a point where taking back congress is critical. That doesn’t mean spreading blatantly false rumors – or certainly not rumors we KNOW to be false… but to this point, I think everyone’s just been reporting the rumors they’ve heard, read, etc…
HOWEVER…
Another question. I haven’t seen it reported or even reported that it’s been asked… Has anyone contacted any area papers or radio stations to inquire about whether the Weller campaign has pulled any ads? If a resignation is in the works – if this is about to break – I believe it would have to happen by Sunday, since this would be the last date the IL GOP could replace Weller on the ballot… seems to me – they would have likely gotten the wheels in motion to start canceling ads by now, right? Just wondering if the questions been asked anywhere and I missed it.
Is it really smart to be diddling with the pages if your father-in-law is a genocidal butcher and former dictator?
To me, that’s why it doesn’t really sound believable. If evidence comes in, I’ll change my mind.
Pete said “It may just be a rumor, but you certainly would not be able to determine that solely through convervations with the congressman’s spokesperson. So i guess its just a wait and see.” Wait and see? How about, ‘I guess we could give the man the benefit of the doubt until we have more than a rumor to condemn him with!’ Now, Brian, your comment that “he and his spokesperson could be expected to deny the charges whether they are true or false” is very telling. As I said to Arch, rumors like this have a way of hurting the subject even if they are conclusively proven false.
Way to C you A there, Arch. ‘I wasn’t spreading a false rumor, it was already widespread; and I had lots of people (that I won’t name, of course) who told me there was something to it all.’
How is the statement that “he and his spokesperson could be expected to deny the charges whether they are true or false” very telling? You think it is likely he would have admitted to a reporter that he was involved in something like this? Hardly likely.
I don’t deny that rumors can damage a subject even where they are conclusively proven false. But no one here started the rumor. Once a rumor is out people (including, apparently, news organizations) naturally try to determine whether it is accurate. Denials from the subject of the rumor (a politician, let’s not forget) are to be expected.
Naturally, the denial may be based on the fact that the rumor is completely false. But a denial on its own does not conclusively prove the rumor false.
I think it is wrong to condemn Weller unless some evidence shows this to be true (I certainly have not condemned him). But that doesn’t mean that I think his denial comes anywhere close to ending the inquiry (of course, it is important to ask him directly b/c an admission really would have ended the inquiry).
grand old partisan — I think you’re forgetting that Arch never posted the name. Passing on a rumor with no name attached can hardly be considered damaging to anyone. Now, those that passed on the name based on unsubstantiated rumor are the ones who should be ashamed.
Seems clear the House committee investigating the Foley fiasco is leaking like a sieve. Unfortunately, something is getting lost in translation. I’m betting there’s more to this and I’m betting that the transcripts of the House hearings are played to a grand jury at some point.
Time will tell.
Look…
After VINCE FOSTER… After “Hitlery”… after labeling John Kerry a traitor and a liar… after John McCain’s ‘illegimate black baby’ in South Carolina…
Is ANYONE seriously saying that anything posted here — any diary at DKos, and speculation and rumor chasing that’s gone on in the blogosphere — has someone how crossed a line?
I’m all for decorum, but fer chrissakes people — the right wing noise machine has crossed the line sooooo faaarrrr — they’ve actually circled back around and are staring us in the ass.
Have we read anything worse than we read in the Scaife NEWSPAPERS in the 90s?
Let me know when we catch up – and then I’ll start decrying the sorry state of the blogosphere.
What a crock. Last time I visit this site. Arch, you must be the left’s version of Drudge. Congratulations.
With friends like you, the Democrats will yet again grab defeat from the jaws of victory.
“I doubt very seriously whether it is untrue. I worked for the House during the 1980’s and Weller was a well known “creep.” ”
Ralph, he was elected in 1994. Perhaps you are thinking about someone else?
Illinois House.
“Once a rumor is out people (including, apparently, news organizations) naturally try to determine whether it is accurate.”
That is HARDLY what anyone here has been trying to doing. It’s been gleeful rumor-mongering, period.
And, please, spare me: “Passing on a rumor with no name attached can hardly be considered damaging to anyone.”
It was apparent from the very start who this rumor was targeted at. To pretend otherwise is an insult to the intelligence of everyone here.
“Once a rumor is out people (including, apparently, news organizations) naturally try to determine whether it is accurate.”
That is HARDLY what anyone here has been trying to doing. It’s been gleeful rumor-mongering, period.
And, please, spare me: “Passing on a rumor with no name attached can hardly be considered damaging to anyone.”
It was apparent from the very start who this rumor was targeted at. To pretend otherwise is an insult to the intelligence of everyone here.
I think its Jerry Weller from Illinois…….at least one of the two implicated congressmen
Recalling rumors of sex, infidelity, homosexuality, crack use and terrorist money that baselessly have surrounded the likes of John Kerry, Blagojevich, Obama, Lisa Madigan, and others, along with the scores of mob-style hits Bill and Hillary Clinton were alleged to have committed, I think I’ll ignore your sanctiomony for the time being, thanks.
The Weller camp issues a public denial… From Lynn Sweet:
“We believe we have now gotten to the bottom of this and other reporters who have researched this agree — that what we have been told is that a page or intern who was sponsored by Cong. Weller was inappropriately invited to a social event with another congressman.”
inappropriately invited? Were they having an casual intelligence briefing or entertaining prostitutes with Duke Cunningham?
Rumor has it, Grand Old Partisan can blow me.
While I think points about other stories are valid in terms of how these situations are treated, we might lay of Grand Old Partisan who is right–I might disagree on too. some fine points, but his points are well taken–I screwed up. I’ll only defend myself in saying I didn’t expect the Wonkette situation so I thought I could keep it under wraps a bit. That was bad judgement and I’ve been around the blogosphere long enough to know better.
grand old partisan, did you ever criticize the GOP for blaming the Foley scandal on Democrats by saying unknown Democrats had the information and sat on it?
Who all did Hastert blame for the Foley scandal?
Please, spare me your indignation.
The Democrats were just trying to keep Hastert from blaming them for sitting on information about another Republican Congressman.
Carl – You’re right, I didn’t criticize Hastert for blaming the Foley disclosure on the Dems, but then again, I didn’t repeat of endorse the idea either.
Here, though, YOU have been spreading lies and rumors that turned out to be baseless and false. And YOU are the one who refuses to do the right thing and retract YOUR efforts to spread those lies on YOUR blog.
Spare me the “you didn’t denounce x” game until you do.