Usually history takes a little time before repeating...

In this case, however, the House Speaker, Dennis Hastert, has followed in the footsteps of the President who would give Tricky Dick a run for his money as far as cover-ups are concerned. Hastert has announced that he will "fire anyone" who has covered-up the Foley issue. It seems eerily reminiscent of Bush's bold announcement that he would "fire anyone" involved in the Valerie Plame leak...then it turned out Karl Rove and Dick Cheney were involved and Bush couldn't follow through: in Rove's case because Rove is Bush's Brain and in Cheney's case, well, you can't really fire your boss.

So Hastert might want to start with himself. Afterall, Hastert claimed at the beginning that he hadn't known about Foley's activities until this past week. Then it came out that he knew about them in the spring of 2006, at which point he backtracked and claimed that he only knew of the more vanilla emails and not the really exciting ones. Since then, of course, numerous aides, staffers, and even other representatives have come forward implicating Hastert and/or his office in much earlier knowledge of the Foley scandal.

At what point did Hastert determine it was more important to squash the Foley issue than it was to come clean? In other words, when did holding onto power become more important to him than faithful service to the American people? Or perhaps in his pedophile-protecting mind the two issues intertwined: "In order to serve the American People, I must hold onto power, no matter what cost."

Cover-ups nearly always fail. Sometimes it takes a long time for them to unravel; Hastert's office apparently knew as early as 2000 about the Foley issue. However, inevitably, the cover-up comes to the open and then your place in history is assured. Hastert will not be remembered as the man who led the House through several really boring years of doing little constructive (and perhaps he will be lucky enough not to be remembered as the man who helped rob the Republicans of their label as "fiscal conservatives"), but rather as the man who tried to use the authority of his office to aid and abet sexual predators...not exactly a high calling.

Now Clinton, we recall, was impeached and acquitted for having sexual relations with an intern (who unlike Mr. Foley's targets was not underage) -- and the Republicans can scream all they want about how it was about lying under oath, but let's be serious: it was for the Monica Lewinsky scandal and nothing else -- so I wonder if Hastert may find himself hoisted on his own petard. Highly doubtful if Republicans maintain control of the House. Doubtful even if they lose control, because the Democrats are world-class weenies.

Foley, for his part, has been very quiet on the subject. Hastert is probably hoping like hell that Foley either keeps his mouth shut or ends up dead, because the house of cards is teetering precariously.