Hastert?
Halifax2TheMax
Posts: 39,025
Longest serving republican (R) speaker of the house. And you thought Clinton, Reverand Al, Jackson or Blogdonavich were bad? Almost makes, almost, Bush and Cheney look like choir boys.
09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
0
Comments
And either way - how is a person being a scumbag relegated to party? Why does this invariably get injected (and hard), instead of looking at a piece of shit for what it (excuse me, HE) is?
There's no different whiff of the shit based on D or R or L or I....is there?
I don't think anyone in these positions deserve a free ride in their actions or words.
It's not okay when anyone does what all of them have done.
I get frustrated when those damn letters are practically branded on some and (mis)used to make a point. It's just silly to me and admittedly gets under my skin especially when tossed in for no valid reason but for affiliation - strange in itself, no?
Judge (as we will, and do) on character and maybe actions, not letters.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-hastert-misconduct-20150529-story.html
"On Friday, federal law enforcement officials said Hastert had paid $1.7 million over the last four years to conceal sexual abuse against a former male student he knew during his days as a teacher in Yorkville, Ill., where Hastert worked until 1981."
This kind of money concealing this kind of abuse? That says something fairly obvious right there.
"On Friday, Hastert resigned from the board of the J. Dennis Hastert Center for Economics, Government and Public Policy at his alma mater, Wheaton College, a small, evangelical Christian college in the Chicago suburbs.
The college respects Mr. Hastert's distinguished public service record and the due process being afforded him pursuant to the charges that have been filed against him, Wheaton officials said in a statement announcing his resignation."
Is it me or does this sound like Wheaton is almost apologetic for this guys behaviors? Wheaton of all places?
i am waiting for fox news to come out and defend hastert. maybe the "feedom" defense fox always uses does not apply to sexual abuse? i mean, come on. hastert was free to choose this boy, right?
gonna sit back and watch this one unfold. where is the popcorn smiley thing?
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
And share Michael Jackson's popcorn with me as well. No salt, though.
could this situation explain why hastert was so soft on foley?
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
i wonder why this family is going to do the interview on fox????
fox will not ask them anything that they will be uncomfortable trying to answer.
what a joke.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I knew some of the kids in Duggar family were going to bring this child abusing situation down. Ladies and gentlemen this is just the beginning. Just watch
Would laugh but it's too sad.
But to answer your question as to why I pointed out the (R) next to his name, as some have already alluded to, its been the (R) party that has been shoving family values down our throat since at least 1978 with Anita Bryant and her anti-gay crusade. The (R) party has made their morality one of their center pieces of their platform and have been hog wild about it ever since. Hell, they put gay marriage on the ballot in key states in the 2004 election knowing full well it would motivate their base. Clinton goes through an impeachment process for lying about a consensual relationship with an intern WHILE the speaker of the house at the time, MR, Gingrich (R) is having an affair while married (then acts outraged that he's asked about it during a presidential candidate debate), his replacement, chosen to replace Newt the Beaut, Rep. Livingston (R), takes to the floor of the house and challenges Clinton to resign as he is about to do for having an affair while married, and the guy (R) who ultimately fills the vacancy has a past history of diddling kid(s). If this were a (D), there would be congressional investigations and every conservative talking head and blogger, pundit, etc. would be lambasting the (D)s for being morally vacant and painting every (D) as guilty by association. When it happens to one of "theirs," crickets. Not a peep. Lets move on, nothing to see here. In one of the other threads, someone made reference to Al Sharpton. Not relevant to the conversation but it gets thrown out there anyway. So, I guess when I disagree with a (R) viewpoint, I'll throw out, "must be a friend of Hastert's."
If you want to see the change, you and I and everyone else need to hold both sides accountable and not give it a pass. Like Fox and Friends and the mosque protest or Hastert (R) and his alleged crimes (sorry, you don't withdraw $1.5 million and violate banking regulations if your innocent). Could he get off. Sure. Will the (R)s come to his defense and praise him if he does. Not likely.
And if they're not going to get rid of the Hastert Rule, they should rename it the Diddling Rule.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
What you said up there makes sense but this, most of all (and which I have always believed and tried to judge/act upon - which, in part, led me to my initial posts):
If you want to see the change, you and I and everyone else need to hold both sides accountable and not give it a pass.
Much like (a) cancer, guessing we've all been affected by these fuckers in one way or another.
Pick any field, any gender, any race, any country, any religion...you get the point.
I can only imagine what those who commit these atrocities experienced themselves, to be unable (or unwilling?) to end the cycle and continue to perpetuate it.
It's a reason - though not even close to an excuse.
reuters.com/article/2015/10/28/us-usa-crime-hastert-idUSKCN0SM17Z20151028
Ex-House Speaker Hastert pleads guilty in hush-money case
"Former U.S. House Speaker Dennis Hastert pleaded guilty on Wednesday to a federal financial crime in a hush-money case stemming from allegations of sexual misconduct, marking the dramatic downfall of a once powerful politician.
In exchange for the guilty plea, federal prosecutors recommended a sentence of zero to six months imprisonment, although the judge could sentence Hastert to up to five years in prison and fine him $250,000.
Hastert, 73, pleaded guilty to one count of "structuring" - withdrawing funds from bank accounts in amounts below $10,000 to evade bank reporting rules on large cash movements. Those rules exist to detect money laundering.
Hastert, a Republican who led the House of Representatives from 1999 to 2007, told U.S. District Judge Thomas Durkin that he knew that what he was doing was wrong.
"I didn't want them to know how I intended to spend the money," he said, reading from a brief statement during a hearing in the federal courthouse in Chicago that lasted a little over 20 minutes.
In the agreement, Hastert admitted to paying $1.7 million in cash to someone he had known for decades to buy that person's silence and compensate for past misconduct toward that individual.
Prosecutors did not spell out what the misconduct was, but unnamed law enforcement officials have told media that it was sexual and involved someone Hastert knew when he was a high school teacher and coach in his hometown of Yorkville, Illinois in the 1960s and 1970s.
Hastert, flanked by two attorneys, stood before the judge and answered a series of questions to indicate that he understood what he was doing. He spoke loudly and clearly at the judge's request.
His lawyers will likely not call witnesses at his sentencing hearing, to avoid opening the door to potentially embarrassing information from his past, according to a defense attorney who has handled similar cases.
"I think it's a really good outcome, from a defense perspective," said Amy Richardson, with the firm of Harris, Wiltshire & Grannis.
MULTIPLE PAYMENTS
A separate charge of lying to the FBI was dismissed.
Hastert, stooped, white-haired and wearing a gray suit with a blue tie, remains free on bond pending a sentencing hearing on Feb. 29.
Hastert and his lawyers left the courthouse and declined to comment to reporters. The former speaker has not spoken publicly since his indictment in May.
In the plea agreement Hastert admitted that he reached an agreement in 2010 with the individual who was a victim of his misconduct, to pay a total of $3.5 million in hush money.
From 2010-2012 Hastert made 15 withdrawals of $50,000 each from a number of banks, meeting with the individual every few months to pay the person an installment.
In April 2012, bank employees asked Hastert for an explanation of the withdrawals and told him they had to report large transactions. After that, he started to withdraw in lower increments. From mid-2012 until late 2014 he made 106 withdrawals of amounts under $10,000 while he kept paying the unnamed individual every few months, according to the plea agreement.
In December 2014, agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation asked Hastert about the withdrawals and he said he was keeping the cash, intentionally concealing the payments to the individual, according to the plea agreement.
If there were any sex abuse it would not lead to criminal charges because the statute of limitations ran out long ago.
"This is one more time where a person with power and authority gets to keep dirty secrets hidden," said Barbara Blaine, founder of SNAP, an advocacy group for survivors of clerical abuse."
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©