'It was sex': Dennis Hastert paid man to hide past misconduct

The former US House of Representatives speaker Dennis Hastert, who was indicted on Thursday on federal criminal charges, was paying a man from his past to try to conceal sexual misconduct, the Los Angeles Times reported on Friday, citing two unnamed federal law enforcement officials.

READ MORE

So much for Republican 'family values"

brmstn69 said:

Lie til you get caught.
When you get caught, lie some more.
Beg forgiveness when proved guilty...

Click to expand...

That really does sum up a typical Republican scandal perfectly

This man was of course speaker when they impeached Clinton, having taken over from two other speaks who had to resign for sexual dalliances.

Democrats don't preach family values, and yet, they seem to be held to a higher standard than the Republicans who do. Surely the hypocrites should be held to a higher standard?

B.

It's similar to the Catholic priesthood.
Condemn gays while you diddle the boys.

But aren't there some facts we are overlooking here?

• There is no charge of sexual misconduct. Hastert's legal problem with the Feds is lying about how he made financial transactions.
• From what we know at this point, it sounds like he was a victim of blackmail. The FBI and IRS should be able to go after whoever was demanding the hush money.
• Since this goes back to his teaching days, that means that the person who got all of this money is between about 50 - 65 years old.
• I repeat, this was not some out-of-court legal settlement because someone brought charges against Hastert; this is more like someone sticking a gun in his face and saying "Give me a million dollars".

topdog said:

But aren't there some facts we are overlooking here?

• 
  this is more like someone sticking a gun in his face and saying "Give me a million dollars".

Click to expand...

Which he payed...because he knew HE DID IT. Apparently he thought 3.5 million was a bargain to protect his stellar reputation and legacy (and the tens if not HUNDREDS of millions he made based on that "reputation")

Another Republican hypocrite caught with his finger up some high school kids b*nghole - he hasn't even had the decency to TRY to deny it publicly.

Total POS!

g

topdog said:

But aren't there some facts we are overlooking here?

• From what we know at this point, it sounds like he was a victim of blackmail. The FBI and IRS should be able to go after whoever was demanding the hush money.

Click to expand...

The guy who was blackmailing David Letterman for 2 million only had
to serve 4 months in prison. It was supposed to be 6 months, but got
out early for good behavior I guess.
I wonder what the penalty would be
for this blackmailer.

topdog said:

But aren't there some facts we are overlooking here?

• There is no charge of sexual misconduct. Hastert's legal problem with the Feds is lying about how he made financial transactions.
• From what we know at this point, it sounds like he was a victim of blackmail. The FBI and IRS should be able to go after whoever was demanding the hush money.
• Since this goes back to his teaching days, that means that the person who got all of this money is between about 50 - 65 years old.
• I repeat, this was not some out-of-court legal settlement because someone brought charges against Hastert; this is more like someone sticking a gun in his face and saying "Give me a million dollars".

Click to expand...

If Hastert had not pursued Clinton for his legal sexual dalliances, I would feel that he was being unfairly victimised - but because he impeached Clinton, this IS a scandal.

The fact that he thought it worth breaking the law to keep this sexual encounter quiet is proof that he knows it's a scandal.

Also - since we don't yet know who the blackmailer is, and since it is related to his time as a coach, is there not still still the spectre of abuse hanging over all this? Hopefully it was consensual sex between adults, but what if it wasn't?

Having said all that, there had better be a prosecution of the blackmailer on the way soon, or the American justice system will have failed. If it was consensual sex between adults, then the blackmailer hasn't got a leg to stand on, and even if it wasn't, blackmail is not the appropriate response to being the victim of a crime!

B.

topdog said:

But aren't there some facts we are overlooking here?

[/LIST]

Click to expand...

We are not overlooking absolute anything. As usual, it's not the crime itself but
the attempted coverup. In this case and any other case involving conservative and fundamentalist crook, why is hypocrisy not a deadly sin?

trencherman said:

We are not overlooking absolute anything. As usual, it's not the crime itself but
the attempted coverup. In this case and any other case involving conservative and fundamentalist crook, why is hypocrisy not a deadly sin?

Click to expand...

I get the hypocrisy - Hastert pursued Clinton on a legal technicality and now the shoe is on the other foot. That definitely makes him unsympathetic, and there is a certain schadenfreude in watching his fall.

My outlook on the hypocrisy is that I thought the whole Clinton-impeachment-for-perjury was unwarranted, and I will apply the same standard to Hastert - why is the FBI going after this?

It's not illegal to pay someone off to keep their mouth shut. On the contrary, it's illegal to ask for money to keep one's mouth shut. On that score, Hastert is the victim, not the criminal.

He structured the cash withdrawals in less than $10,000 increments, so the banks wouldn't raise an alarm to the Feds. That is technically illegal, but the reason for that is to catch drug, mafia, or bribe money being moved. I can't think of another instance of someone being prosecuted for that when it wasn't also a part of a drug or mafia bust.

The FBI did their investigation, they discovered what he was using the money for (nothing illegal) - yet they slapped him with this cash structuring technical charge, and for perjury when he lied to them earlier about what he was using the money for. (That fits pretty squarely with the "lying about sex" perjury that was used against Clinton, which I also thought was much ado about nothing.)

Why bother to do that? This is not a public official taking bribes; Hastert was not funding drug lords or secretly supporting terrorists. He was the victim of blackmail. It seems to me that the FBI should be going after the blackmailer, not the guy that was being scammed out of millions.

Certainly Hastert is a big hypocrite. No argument there. But its not illegal to be an asshole.

The person I have NO SYMPATHY for is the middle-aged guy that bled the former House Speaker of millions, just because he knew he had him over a barrel. Talk about greedy! Maybe if he got $200k and called it a day I might think - well OK, he got even. But $3 million!

topdog said:

The FBI did their investigation, they discovered what he was using the money for (nothing illegal) - yet they slapped him with this cash structuring technical charge, and for perjury when he lied to them earlier about what he was using the money for. (That fits pretty squarely with the "lying about sex" perjury that was used against Clinton, which I also thought was much ado about nothing.)

Click to expand...

I agree that the Clinton thing was BS, but Hastert DID NOT - so from a moral point of view, I think he's getting his just deserts - by HIS OWN STANDARDS, he should be prosecuted for this, just like he went after Clinton.

If I was an American tax payer I would be pissed off though - like you say, why is the FBI wasting resources on this?

I can envision one possible theory, but it is PURE SPECULATION. Is this akin to getting maffia guys on tax law? Do the feds have reason to believe he did something really awful like rape or abuse of a minor, but aren't sure they can get a conviction, and are doing this so at least they get him for something?

I'm not saying that is what's happening, but it is one scenario in which the actions being taken by the feds now would make sense.

topdog said:

It seems to me that the FBI should be going after the blackmailer, not the guy that was being scammed out of millions.

Click to expand...

The second shoe may yet still drop on this. It's possible that there is an as-yet-not-unsealed indictment in the works against the blackmailer.

topdog said:

The person I have NO SYMPATHY for is the middle-aged guy that bled the former House Speaker of millions, just because he knew he had him over a barrel. Talk about greedy! Maybe if he got $200k and called it a day I might think - well OK, he got even. But $3 million!

Click to expand...

I agree with you on that completely.

No matter what Hastert did to him, even if it was some kind of terrible abuse, that does not make blackmail OK. And, if it was consensual sex between adults, then that makes his blackmail REALLY not OK!

B.