Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Hospitals; Hastert; Poisoned legislators; Ameren; Pay raise; Luechtefeld; Malpractice (Use all caps in password)
Posted in:
The State Journal-Register slams Congressman John Shimkus hard today over his involvement in the Foley page scandal. Shimkus chaired the page board, you will recall. The editorial is entitled: Shimkus now looks like an insider. Go read the whole thing.
“After Rep. Foley resigned, on approximately October 2, 2006,†the report states, “Rep. Shimkus told fellow Page Board member Rep. Shelley Moore Capito that he believed he had done the right thing in 2005 based on the information he had, but added words to the effect of ‘Dale’s (Rep. Dave Kildee) a nice guy, but he’s a Democrat, and I was afraid it would be blown out of proportion.â€
In November 2005, Shimkus had confronted Foley and told him to stay away from pages after the parents of a former page provided excerpts of a suggestive e-mail to their son from Foley. Shimkus at that point had only seen excerpts of the e-mails, the report notes, and neither he nor others demanded to see the full text of the e-mails. […]
…(I)t has already detailed the hectic buzz of meetings on the Hill that followed Foley’s resignation. Reading the report, one gets the feeling that these meetings were long on political damage control and short on taking responsibility. (The full text of the report is available at www.house.gov/ethics/Page Report.pdf.)
In an Oct. 4 meeting with The State Journal-Register editorial board, Shimkus stated, “I don’t know of a single thing I would have done differently.†In that same interview, he said that the e-mail excerpts he saw in 2005 were fairly innocuous. Yet he also said he told Foley to cease all contact with pages based on those excerpts. We wondered at the time why he would not have demanded to see the full text of e-mails to understand whether the excerpts really were innocuous. In Friday’s report, the ethics committee wonders essentially the same thing. […]
But it also makes clear that for Shimkus - who in 2005 disavowed his term limit pledge - the days of campaigning as an outsider standing up to Washington’s insider culture are long gone.
My own opinion is that the page scandal means Shimkus will have lots of trouble running statewide, if he ever decides to make that jump. Your thoughts?
*** UPDATE *** Shimkus to resign from the Page Board, according to AP.
Former House chief clerk Jeff Trandahl told the ethics committee that he warned Shimkus in November 2005 that Foley was a “ticking time bomb” who had been confronted repeatedly about e-mails sent to pages. Shimkus confronted Foley then and told him to stop sending e-mails to a former Louisiana page.Shimkus said Monday he doesn’t remember that warning, however.
“I do not recall Jeff Trandahl telling me that,” Shimkus said. “I recall me being the only member of Congress that confronted Foley.”
Shimkus also suggested politics was at play in the Foley scandal.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 10:19 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Hospitals; Hastert; Poisoned legislators; Ameren; Pay raise; Luechtefeld; Malpractice (Use all caps in password)
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
“My own opinion is that the page scandal means Shimkus will have lots of trouble running statewide, if he ever decides to make that jump. Your thoughts?”
Ummmm… ya think?
Comment by sam Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 10:30 am
Yes, Shimkus is a big disappointment. His inaction on the Foley matter just begs the question even more of what was the point of breaking his term limit promise. Heading the committee that oversees the page program has got to be one of the easiest gigs out there. If he’s not up to that job he oughta get out.
Comment by whatever Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 10:35 am
He’d have problems State wide without the page scandal…that’s just a small burr under the saddle.
Comment by Bill Baar Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 10:39 am
Nope. The page scandal is history as of this weekend. In two years, reality will require that other issues be debated and Shimkus has gerrymandered his district to stay in power.
If William Jefferson can be found with $90,000 frozen cash in his freezer after two aides were found guilty of bribery and fingered him YET he still gets re-elected - Shimkus is fine.
Comment by VanillaMan Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 10:43 am
Shimkus is using the report as vindication to demand an apology from Durbin, which is just ridiculous. There’s just no connection to reality here.
Comment by Snark Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 10:47 am
Shimkus said the House clerk referred the former Louisiana page’s case to him, explaining the parents wanted the matter handled quietly. He said that request was why he did not say anything about it to the other page board members, including a Democrat.
“Because I keep faith and confidence with the parental request” for privacy, he said.
The reality is today you can’t honor requests like this. Someone drops a charge like this on you, your response is: look, you need to call the cops and the page board. If you don’t, I will.
Comment by Bill Baar Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 10:52 am
Oops, that’s an old article.
Comment by Snark Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 10:52 am
Looks like the govt. has spent more time poking around some mope’s refrigerator than who was trying to poke a teenager. I was stunned the report did not suggest someone should have grabbed Foley’s computers to see what was really going on. We place more demands on playground aides and crossing guards that Congress and their staff.
Comment by Reddbyrd Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 11:26 am
Red.. I think Foley’s computers were some of the first things sealed up and taken.
Comment by Bill Baar Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 11:34 am
Not if you rea the report…everyone just wagged their tongues, shook their fingers and did not bother to see what else th pervert was up too… and this goes back over several years…no one called 911 (something mandated reporters are required to do) no one called the Capitol Police.
Just a few meetings, foggy memories and a whitewash.
Comment by Reddbyrd Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 11:42 am
I don’t think Shimkus has statewide potential. A more interesting question is about Rahm. It came out over the weekend (in a print story from CNN and several blogs) that, not only did he know about the emails in 2005, but he blatantly lied about having that knowledge on ABC’s “This Week.” For the moment,it doesn’t look like that story is gaining any traction. But if he ran for statewide office, I’m sure the print story of his knowledge would be run along side his denial on TV in an oppo ad. It could be very powerful, especially given that at the very instant that he is denying knowledge, he is laying out a strong moral indictment of Republicans (and thus also of himself)for sitting on that knowledge.
Comment by realist Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 11:52 am
Durbin certainly doesn’t owe Shimkus an apology. Shimkus, like many, lost his independent character and couldn’t muster the courage to do what was right regarding Foley. I believe he was doing more than simply a cya for his pals. No doubt there is more to the story. Just how deeply involved was Shimkus? In addition, he ran on a platform of “No more than three terms†then opted to serve the people because it was his duty. Not how I envision the character of a West Point graduate. No any honor in that broken promise. As stated by others, he can forget anything larger politically.
Comment by Justice Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 12:08 pm
If he wanted closure of his involvement with the Foley scandal, then this is not the report Shimkus wanted.
Shimkus should have WANTED to a reprimand.
Why ?
Because that would have given him closure.
Not one individual was held responsible for the Mark Foley page scandal. No violation of House rules. No reprimands. The House ethics committee found people were “willfully ignorant” of the situation and noted the contradictory statements from Shimkus and others - e.g. Shimkus saw language in e-mails from Foley to minors that Shimkus said were merely “innocuous”- but then Shimkus went to Foley and told him to quit contacting the minors) - but no one was reprimanded or censured for heir misconduct.
Now, Dems will say, “Of course, the GOP Ethics panel cleared Shimkus of all charges. It was another clear example of the Republican’s politics of corruption. What we need is a REAL investigation.”
And then Shimkus is faced with wither this demand for a new investigation following him around or a new investigation. None of which allows Shimkus to move forward and avoid his role in the Foley affair.
Again, if Shimkus had just been reprimanded or centured, then he could’ve taken his punishment (hollow as it may be), expressed his regret, explained his lessons learned and moved on.
Comment by Scott Fawell's Cellmate Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 12:17 pm
If Shimkus would volunteer to spend the remainder of his term in office serving in active duty status, on the front lines, in Iraq, I might vote for him to be a dog catcher. Oops, I love dogs too much to trust him to care for them. So guess the only thing that serving in Iraq would do for him is that I would only hold him in contempt instead of utter contempt.
Comment by Joannie Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 12:44 pm
It’s all much ado about nothing. I agree witht the comment re: William Jefferson. And lets face it folks, Illinois is as corrput as Louisiana.
Comment by Milorad Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 12:53 pm
Shimkus was out of his league to begin with– as a Republican who won office in Madison County, he was encouraged to believe that he really had something going for himself. This delusion may explain the term limit promise; he just never thought that he would still be in the House when it came time to “pay up”.
As it is, Shimkus has been found out as someone who welched on a major promise (that pesky term limits thing)and now as one who simply did not do the right thing when confronted by the Foley scandal.
Trying to bluster around and blame Dick Durbin just draws attention to Shimkus’ real shortcomings as a congressman and as a person.
Comment by Ole Prof Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 1:07 pm
Unfortunately I still have this yahoo as my congressman for two years.
Comment by Southern Ilinois Democrat Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 2:25 pm
Ole Prof
Oh you mean like being pro life? If you remember Durbin ran as a pro life conservative dem now for national power he flipped. If Durbin who had the same seat can run and win statewide so can Shimkus.
Comment by RAI Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 3:43 pm
This entire “scandal” was a political hit job. Republicans are their own worst enemies when being bludgeoned by less principled opponents. Gosh, they are like baby seals.
If Foley did anything criminal with a minor, I hope he spends serious time in prison. So far, that does not seem to be the case. I am not in favor of throwing gay men in prison for hitting on 18 year-olds, no matter how tacky I think it is. It could be sexual harassment in the workplace (if anyone still admits that is wrong after Clinton), but I haven’t seen evidence of that yet, either.
All this is to say that if Foley is not found guilty of any criminal activity, then how can Shimkus be responsible for not stopping him from doing the wrong things he never did? So far, I think Shimkus has every right to resent the way he has been abused in the press and on the blogs. From what I know of him, he is a pretty straight shooter and would be very upset over these character attacks.
Comment by Middle Majority Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 5:04 pm
I really have no sympathy for Shimkus on this one. None.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 5:06 pm
From the updated AP story:
“I recall me being the only member of Congress that confronted Foley.â€
Maybe the other two members of the page board oversight committee might have joined you Congressman, HAD YOU BOTHERED TO INFORM THEM OF THE SITUATION.
No sympathy indeed. Clearly Rep. Shimkus is the victim here. Clearly.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 6:06 pm
I personally think Shimkus’ constituents should be asking him to resign. Shimkus himself is a former page– I don’t think this has been widely reported. I served as a page in the 1980s for Congressman Yates. This was a few years after the first page scandal and the pages were all basically on lock-down. We barely spoke to members, much less jumped in their convertibles. Shimkus should be ashamed of himself.
Comment by Former Page Monday, Dec 11, 06 @ 11:33 pm
Shimkus overwhelmingly won re-election with this known.
Comment by T.J. Tuesday, Dec 12, 06 @ 6:22 pm