Posted on 05/28/2015 4:40:52 PM PDT by navysealdad
Former Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert was indicted Thursday by a federal grand jury in Chicago. The Illinois Republican, 73, is charged with trying to evade cash withdrawal requirements, and with lying to the FBI about it.
(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...
Hi newbie. I think the structuring law is from before.
WMAL said today that it looks like hush payments to a person stemming from his days as a high school teacher.
Oh my!
Another newbie. What a shock.
You would think that Hastert would have learned enough about scandal management that he could have weathered any storm that took place 30 years ago. Even a sex charge. I guess he thought he was too clever.
But what bothers me more is that he had a spare $3.5M that he could afford to pay to the blackmailer. A teacher turned politician-you know he didn't make that money from his pensions. Looks to me to be a corrupt politician. Hard to feel sorry for a guy that made so many bad decisions. Enjoy your years in jail, Denny!
Yep, when he defended William Jefferson, Democrat-La, I knew he was just doing it because he knew they would come for him next.
I think you are very much correct. This nonsense has been going on for years.
Same basic thing, being a track fan, there is a reporting requirement if you win $10k on a bet, also. Has been for ages.
So, we try never to win that much. ;-)
What?
“when people do that it is called “structuring” which is itself a felony.”
That ‘restructuring’ is an invented crime for the government to control what we do with our own money. It was, I believe created to catch drug lords who like to deal in cash. To use it to go after anyone who is not a drug lord criminal, ought to be illegal for the government to use, as it is, they use it to make innocent people into criminals and to increase its own revenue by leving ‘fines.’
Oh, really?
Did you guys ever actually READ this thing?
http://www.fincen.gov/statutes_regs/patriot/
Did I say he was keeping it? If it is his money, so what what he was doing with it unless, of course, it was something illegal.
Sounds like he was being blackmailed. I would not be surprised if there isn’t a lot of that going on in Washington. What else explains some of their suspicious behavior and voting patterns.
First off ,”It is creepy how the government is so concerned about people keeping cash. I understand about detecting illegal transactions and/or tax avoidance. But sometimes people just like to keep cash. My grandfather used to. It was just the way he was. But that was a long time ago.”
You certainly discussed keeping the money even though its not the case here and has nothing to do with the case.
Second you say it sounds like he was being blackmailed.
“According to the indictment, Individual A has known Hastert for “most of Individual A’s life.” The indictment says during a meeting in 2010, Hastert agreed to pay $3.5 million “in order to compensate for and conceal his prior misconduct against Individual A.”
Sounds more like he was bribing the person.
That was a general statement and not specific to the case. You are are picking at stupid stuff. Perhaps my post was unclear. I’ll take the blame. But really, you are picking at stupid stuff.
As to the blackmail/bride issue:
All blackmailers are being bribed to keep silent. All takers of bribes are, by taking it, transforming into a blackmailer as the cash rolls in. The fact that payment was ongoing leaves both sides looking guilty. It works both ways.
And if any of my posts have mistakes in them, I apologize ahead of time. I sometimes need to be more careful.
“All takers of bribes are, by taking it, transforming into a blackmailer as the cash rolls in”
tsk tsk you’re making things up. Blackmailing is an action. Taking a bribe is generally speaking , passive.
If you keep taking a bribe you are active, not passive. I would argue that you are active with the first bribe in that you do not HAVE to take it. But this is an ongoing situation so...by taking it you are also essentially a blackmailer. You may tell your conscience you are not, but the act of accepting money to stay silent — whereas if you did not get the money you would not stay silent — is the same thing as being a blackmailer. It just was not your idea to blackmail, but you went along with it. If it were not blackmail, the person could quit paying you.
Thank you...
He was a former high school teacher and wrestling coach.
****************************************
Rush just read this and said “hmmmmmmm” and started laughing.
The [alleged] humans claiming the things you've just claimed have lost one court case already, and motion after motion in a second case. Why do you think the NCAA rescinded their sanctions? It was because they were facing complete annihilation in court. The solicitor for Louis Freeh went so far as to claim that his "report" was not actionable because it contained "only opinion" and was not a statement of any facts.
[That's what people who actually bother to learn the evidence have been saying all along.]
The accusations over Paterno's "involvement" in Sandusky's crimes is as preposterous as the "Satanic Abuse" cases of the 1980's. Janet Reno made her name on those cases, the public was outraged, and EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM WAS A LIE. She has never apologized, despite the fact that some of the real victims of those trials were in prison for a decade or more. When the courts exonerate Paterno, will you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.