Yep, ya just got to love the hiprocracy.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...former-house-speaker-dennis-hastert-indicted/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...former-house-speaker-dennis-hastert-indicted/
Dennis Hastete indicted
- Thread starter Ragman
- Start date
From Foxnews.com
The indictment says that Hastert then agreed to provide $3.5 million “in order to compensate for and conceal his prior misconduct against Individual A.” It does not elaborate on the alleged misconduct or indicate if Individual A is a man or a woman. However, it says the person has known Hastert most of the person's life. It also says the person has been a resident of Yorkville, Illinois, where Hastert was a high school teacher and wrestling coach from 1965 to 1981.
Makes one go . . . hmmmm.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...house-dennis-hastert-on-bank-related-charges/
What hypocrisy? Imagine a politician from Chicago getting indicted for some sort of financial chicanery!
Of course all kinds of things come to mind, from shoe-tapping signals between the men's room stalls, to Jerry Sandusky kinds of stuff in the locker room, to just plain old blackmail. In any case he's following the tradition of a long line of Chicago politicians from both parties.
I concur. I don't see the hypocrisy. And hypocrisy is something I actually look for, because I find it equally galling and amusing at the same time.
If he had spent some or most of his life publicly deriding others for trying to hide payments to their blackmailers, this would be hypocrisy.
Throughout his political career he often spoke fondly of his time as a wrestling coach. If it turns out that he engaged in a little KY wrestling himself with one of his wrestlers, it still might be a fond memory, so no hypocrisy there. Trying to keep it quiet isn't hypocrisy, it's just scummy smart. {that's like a Scooby Snack, only very different}
Imagine the horror of having a Speaker of the House who is so ethically compromised that he or she can be blackmailed to the tune of millions of dollars for prior bad acts? Yes, supposedly the hush money payments began after Hastert left Congress, but the threat of extortion must have been present for many, many years. The man was second in line for presidential succession, for Heaven's sake. Hastert controlled which bills came to the floor for a vote. He influenced committee assignments. We were at war during his reign, all the while Hastert is living with some sinister secret ready to explode. We Americans argue over many petty political shenanigans; Hastert's inner demons being kept secret, whatever they prove to be, are the stuff of real, bonafide scandal. Getting one's name on a ballot and being popularly elected shouldn't, by itself, qualify one to hold high political office. There must be a vetting process where background checks are thorough and routinely updated. Scoundrels!
Corruption of elected officials in being influenced by money is bad enough, but at least that can be dealt with. Bring in a position of power and being in a position of being blackmailed is something else entirely. Makes you wonder how many past (and present) Senators and Congressman have been "influenced" under threat of exposing a sexual affair, be it straight, gay or pedoesque.
The hypocrisy is emerging from the gleeful Democrats crowing about this indictment by the Obama/Lynch Justice Dept. (The phrase "Lynch mob" comes to mind" - just sayin'). The irony of this whole thing is that this deal wouldn't even be news if Hastert was a Democrat.
Bill Clinton's sexual escapades were on full display during his stays in the AR governor's mansion and the White House and he was given a pass; his lovely wife's corrupt activities have been routinely brushed aside by the MSM and after serving as a senator from NY she's running for POTUS for the 2nd time.
Barney Frank had a lengthy homosexual relationship with a male hooker with a prostitution operation being conducted from his apartment. His punishment after this came out? He kept his seat in the House and got re-elected to another term by the voters in his district.
Maybe Hastert's mistake was not being flagrantly open about whatever it was he was doing.
Bill Clinton's sexual escapades were on full display during his stays in the AR governor's mansion and the White House and he was given a pass; his lovely wife's corrupt activities have been routinely brushed aside by the MSM and after serving as a senator from NY she's running for POTUS for the 2nd time.
Barney Frank had a lengthy homosexual relationship with a male hooker with a prostitution operation being conducted from his apartment. His punishment after this came out? He kept his seat in the House and got re-elected to another term by the voters in his district.
Maybe Hastert's mistake was not being flagrantly open about whatever it was he was doing.
Yes
Yes
Extorting someone is an illegal act. Money gained from that illegal act should be returned. Although, as of now, no extortion charges have been brought, so that issue is in limbo. If the 'victim' wanted to receive monetary damages, he should have done it legally in a civil court. I'm not sure what the statute of limitations are for a civil suit, but it has probably been too long ago for criminal charges.
Last edited:
I ask the questions whether the extortionist should be prosecuted and should extorted money kept because a large segment of the American public are going to want Hastert's head on a pike if allegations of sexual misconduct toward a minor are true. Of course, the extortionist should be prosecuted. However, don't be surprised if the prosecutors and law enforcement officials have granted immunity to the alleged victim in exchange for his testimony and cooperation. If that's the case, forget about equal application of the law. They wanted Hastert all along and cared nothing about prosecuting the extortionist. We don't know yet if this is what happened, just speculation. Extortion is a horrid and ugly crime just as much as sexual misconduct.
If the blackmail has been an ongoing scheme with payoffs over the years, the blackmailer should be prosecuted and the money returned - assuming there's any left. Of course this is all speculation at this point, but this sounds like Hastert may have had a willing partner at the time who came forward later to extort money when his political position provided the necessary leverage. Then again, if Hastert's partner was underage why didn't he do both - prosecute and file a civil lawsuit? No doubt juicy details will be forthcoming.
Other questions that come to mind: wonder how long have the Dems been sitting on this scandal and how long have the Repubs been aware of it?
Other questions that come to mind: wonder how long have the Dems been sitting on this scandal and how long have the Repubs been aware of it?
True, granting immunity to someone who possibly was extorting Hastert doesn't seem right or fair.
You would think extorting someone would trump illegal withdrawals from a bank to pay the extortionist.
It looks like the possible abuse happened a long time ago. Hastert quit being a teacher and coach in the very early 1980s. The statute of limitations is usually 12 years after the victims 18th birthday to file charges
Article excerpt:
State statutes, in most child sexual abuse cases occurring before August 2002, require criminal charges to be brought within 12 years of the victim's 18th birthday. There can be some variations to that rule, however, if certain fact patterns apply.
I don't know why the person didn't file charges back then.
It is too late now though. The individual is roughly around 50 years old or older.
There were a few stories and rumors several years ago about Hastert possibly being gay, (from left leaning news sites, blogs) but not much else.
http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/in..._turns_down_sandusky.html#incart_river_mobile
Last edited:
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
You need to look at Hastert's comments in regards to the Mark Foley scandal (remember him ?) with underage Congressional pages.
Interestingly, some thought, at the time, that Hastert tried to cover that up and keep a lid on it.