Congress, Criminal law, Politics

Former House Speaker Hastert Indicted

220px-Dennis_Hastert_109th_pictorial_photoThe details on the indictment of former U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert, 73, have remained hazy with some notable gaps in the underlying criminal enterprise alleged in the complaint. The theory is that Hastert was paying millions to a blackmailer and tried to hide the payment through “structuring” of withdrawing less than $10,000 to avoid reporting to the federal government. What is interesting however is that the underlying alleged blackmailer has not been charged. There is also the question of the subject of the earlier “misconduct” and whether it could be charged. Some offenses like child molestation can be charged many years after the fact. Hastert was indicted on two counts for charged with lying to the F.B.I. and the structuring of withdrawals, both carrying a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

Hastert is accused of structuring the withdrawal of $925,000 in cash and then lying to the FBI about the withdrawals. The FBI says that Hastert met with an unnamed individual in 2010 and discussed “prior misconduct.” It must have been pretty serious “misconduct” if the parties agreed on the payment of $3.5 million “in order to compensate for and conceal his prior misconduct against Individual A.”

From 2010 to 2014, Hastert withdrew a total of approximately $1.7 million in cash from various bank accounts and provided it to this unnamed individual. When the bank raised questions in 2012 about the large withdrawals, Hastert reportedly reduced the withdrawals through structuring. In April 2014, Hastert allegedly lied about the money and said he did not trust banks and was keeping the case — when he was giving the money to this individual.

Hastert has been working with the lobbying and law firm of Dickstein Shapiro LLC.

It is curious to have so little information on the underlying facts and “misconduct” or the status of the person receiving such money. Perhaps we will learn more in the coming days about the nature of the misconduct and why the individual was not charged if this were a case of blackmail.

Source: New York Times

272 thoughts on “Former House Speaker Hastert Indicted”

  1. Wadewilliams

    The government routinely piles up on charges against defendants in hopes of securing a plea deal or some wonderful award from JT’s law school or the local bar association (tough on crime, the savior complex of the prosecutor).

    However, just because Mr. Hastert is thrown to the wolves does not mean we should be interested in less questioning of the government and organized procedure (In US v. Hastert, the US still has much greater power).

    It should not be two-tiered in this way. I don’t care who is getting prosecuted, the process should face much scrutiny.

    You are right that Hastert will likely get more than a fair shake and everyone on here knows that, especially JT. He is a white male, with formerly great power and currently great wealth. As David Petraeus how that works in court.

    Hastert was a sleazy thug before any of this stuff. A rational man needs no legal system (a powerful, inculcated judge) to tell him that is true.

    1. TJustice – there is no indication in his career that Hastert was a “sleazy thug”. Thug implies violence.

  2. Schulte is answering two different questions.

    He left off the last word: incoherently

  3. Paul, I worked in brain injury rehab, psych, Alzheimer’s/dementia, general medical units, in my 30 plus years of nursing. Your insistence that Hastert was engaged in ‘legitimate’ sex with a minor is odd. In one breath you claim that age 23 can be less than adult, yet in the other breath you claim underage teens are fair game for sex with adult teachers. You’re speaking out of both sides of your mouth.

  4. RTC has not read Bernie Sanders rape fantasies. Sick stuff!

  5. RTC puts up Barney Frank as a virtuous politician. You can’t make this stuff up. LOL!!!

  7. The age of most freshmen is 14 or 15. Paul, you sound like you considered high school students to be “of age”, they are NOT. We don’t know how old this male adolescent was.

    1. Inga – what I have considered is that you have been wrong in claiming that Hastert is a pedophile and it is possible that his relationship was consensual. And the student was of age. High school students do get to be 18-19.

  8. Always Wrong and Proud of It

    Monica was 22, a college graduate, fully emancipated, not living at home and sexually experienced.

    And you think that equates to a kid still in high school.

    Ladies and Gentlemen, allow me to introduce you to the thought processes of a teacher of at-risk students in Arizona.

    Obviously, critical thinking was not big in Arizona.

    1. Wadewilliams – at any time did Monica Lewinski act like she was an adult. The human brain does not reach adulthood until age 23.

      Inga – I also taught college students. That is where I started teaching. And I can tell you from experience, some of them are not thinking like adults. You worked in geriatrics, right?

  9. I suppose we could classify Hastert as a Ephebophiliac, though it is not a generally accepted term. But it might get people interested using the dictionary again.

  10. Max-1 – one of my gay brothers had a ‘thing’ for older men. Not sure about any of his teachers but he did alright with college professors at ASU.

  11. Oh please.

    Monica was just like some 18 year old high school student being pursued by his teacher/coach?

  12. So the truth wins out…
    … Conservative Christians need gays to be in the closet to keep them company.

  13. Paul C.
    What proof do you have that this ‘relationship’ Dennis had when he was a high school teacher with a student of his was anything but ‘consensual’?

    Why the need for ‘hush money’ then?

  14. Again Paul C.
    He can not be charged with underaged sex with a minor because the staute of limitations has well expired. See above (links provided) to the specific laws he Hastert helped pass that he is being charged with.

    However, the hypocrisy of it all should be a red flag, especially to those who ‘thought’ he was an honest upstanding man. He is not.

    Hoisted upon his own petard!

    1. Max-1 – Hoist with his owne petar is the correct quotation.

  16. Paul C.
    The same defense you’re employing…
    … Depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is.

    1. Max-1 – you have to find out what the crime was at the time, not now. You cannot be charged with a future crime although I am sure the DoJ would love to try.

  18. Paul C.
    Do you think there is a blue singlet with Denny’s DNA splashed on it?

  19. Paul C.
    This happened when Denny was teaching in high school.
    Wrestling coach. Think showers…

Comments are closed.