Drudge “Prank” Story Debunked By Former Page’s Lawyer
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in General Politics, LawIt looks like the prank was on Matt Drudge.
From The Oklahoman:
The attorney disputed as “a piece of fiction� a report on a widely viewed Internet site, The Drudge Report, that Edmund’s exchanges with Foley were a prank by the page.Jones said, “There is not any aspect of this matter that is a practical joke nor should anyone treat it that way.�
FYI.
This entry was posted on Friday, October 6th, 2006 and is filed under General Politics, Law. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
October 6th, 2006 at 5:23 pm
Justin
Regarding the “prank”, let me get this straight. Jordan Edmund’s lawyer says there was no prank, so that’s that. WHAT DID YOU EXPECT HIM TO SAY? And if Mr. Edmund is the child “vic” he’s been portrayed as, WHY IS HE LAWYERED UP?
October 6th, 2006 at 5:59 pm
That might be a fair point if not for the facts:
1) There is more than one page making this claim
2) There is more than one REPUBLICAN congressman making this claim
3) Foley resigned without even attempting to deny it.
Seriously, it scares the heck out of me how far people are willing to suspend belief just to support a particular party/cause. This applies to the left , right and center–whatever.
You need to seriously evaluate your critical-thinking skills.
October 6th, 2006 at 10:23 pm
“And if Mr. Edmund is the child “vicâ€Â? he’s been portrayed as, WHY IS HE LAWYERED UP?”
Gee, couldit have anything to do with the fact that he’s been outed on a right wing web site, and his name is all over the news as having essentially entrapped Foley? But you’re right, why believe him against someone with Drudge’s credibility?
October 7th, 2006 at 12:08 am
Anyone in the kind of position of public exposure that Edmund is in who doesn’t get a lawyer is insane.
October 7th, 2006 at 11:59 am
What’s a lawyer to say, “Yeah he targeted Foley and transferred the info to Democratic operatives? What Foley did was clearly wrong and Republicans oust such folks, but bottom line is, Dems spend tons of Money looking for dirt and holding it until it is politically expedient to do so.
Fighting against the vast left-wing conspiracy to convert Faith in God to Dependence in Government – politisite
October 7th, 2006 at 12:21 pm
“”What Foley did was clearly wrong and Republicans oust such folks, but bottom line is, Dems spend tons of Money looking for dirt and holding it until it is politically expedient to do so.”"
And the fact that the Republican House infrastructure held onto their information rather than address the possible criminal behaviour places them in some exalted moral position?
Expediancy seems to be a two-way street.
October 7th, 2006 at 12:40 pm
To GerryF,
Jordan Edmund is now 21. He turned 18 in FEBRUARY 2003. Edmund left the page program in 2002. The salacious IMs occurred in APRIL 2003. Edmund’s name has been linked to discussions of a “book about pages” BEFORE Foleygate. The Foleygate bomb dropped on the last day that Congress was in session and 30+ days before a close election. So please, don’t lecture me about suspended disbelief and critical reasoning. Instead, check my dates, research my facts and DEBUNK THEM, if you can.
October 7th, 2006 at 12:48 pm
There are no facts to research, Stanley, unless you can offer some proof instead of partisan speculation that Democrates were involved. Maybe it was a Republican who finally just grew sick of the idea of Foley returning to office again after what he’d done. Maybe some Republican was irked not only at Foley but the people who enabled his behavior even after they knew he had problems and didn’t dig deeper.
October 7th, 2006 at 8:37 pm
Stanley Jackson queries:
“And if Mr. Edmund is the child “vicâ€Â? he’s been portrayed as, WHY IS HE LAWYERED UP?”
That’s easy…
1) Interview arrangements (CNN, Faux, “Dateline,” “60 Minutes,” Oprah)
2) Publishing rights
3) TV sweeps movie rights
Thanks
Agnostick
[email protected]