The Hastert Surprise

I don't know where you get the 1.7 million. It's been reported in the press as 3.5 million.
I think the distinction is between "part of a plan to pay $3.5 million" and "had paid":

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.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-hastert-misconduct-20150529-story.html
 
milkweed said:
But maybe homosexual acts were still against the law. Do you really want to go there?
Homosexual acts were made legal in Illinois in 1961. The age of consent was 18.

One doubts Hastert's primary worry was legal prosecution, regardless.
 
For some reason, I am under the impression this person was a senior. Not sure why, may have been a wiki point thats no longer there (many edits recently).

So far, none of the news has described his conduct with the student as a crime. Rather its called misconduct.

However I am wondering why this person (student A) hasnt been charged with extortion. So far the only crime being alleged is Lying to the FBI and trying to circumvent bank reporting requirements.
 
Hate to say this but Hastert may not have broken any laws regarding his contacts with students.

From 1965 to 1981, Hastert was a high school teacher and coach. I dont know when Illinois made its consent law 17 but thats what it is now. Wait, found something...

In 1920 it was 16. In 1885 it was 10...(ick)

http://www.sunypress.edu/pdf/60840.pdf

The Move To Criminalize
Illinois may have been the first state to criminalize teacher-student affairs, making it a felony in 1988 for teachers to have sex with students of any age. ..

http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2012/0...o-bar-teachers-from-having-sex-with-students/

But maybe homosexual acts were still against the law. Do you really want to go there?
So is it your argument that no crime exists simply because the statute of limitations has expired, or are you just ignorant of the statue of limitations? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statute_of_limitations

If that is so, then using your line of thinking/ignorance, Al Capone wasn't a gangster either.
 
For some reason, I am under the impression this person was a senior. Not sure why, may have been a wiki point thats no longer there (many edits recently).

So far, none of the news has described his conduct with the student as a crime. Rather its called misconduct.

However I am wondering why this person (student A) hasnt been charged with extortion. So far the only crime being alleged is Lying to the FBI and trying to circumvent bank reporting requirements.
And criminal activity isn't "misconduct"? The reasons student A hasn't been charged with extortion is because you need a victim of extortion (e.g. Hastert), and Hastert isn't claiming he was or is or was a victim of extortion. Two, there is that same issue of the statute of limitations. At this point, all they have is an agreement for Hastert to pay student A compensation for harm inflicted upon student A by Hastert decades ago. Paying your victim compensation or just giving your victim money for whatever reason isn't by any stretch illegal. Unless and until Hastert claims to be a victim of extortion, there is no prosecutable case for extortion. But structuring and lying to the FBI is illegal, that is why Hastert has been charged with those crimes.
 
Last edited:
I think the distinction is between "part of a plan to pay $3.5 million" and "had paid":

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.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-hastert-misconduct-20150529-story.html
Thanks, I suspected as much. But the fact remains, Hastert had agreed to pay 3.5 million dollars to keep this quiet. The Sun Times, based on Hastert's latest financial disclosures has an estimated net worth of 10 million dollars. Hastert is giving up about a third of his net worth to keep this secret. That is a significant secret.

http://national.suntimes.com/national-politics/7/72/1202800/dennis-hastert-net-worth-after-congress
 
Last edited:
Milkweed said:
For some reason, I am under the impression this person was a senior. Not sure why, may have been a wiki point thats no longer there (many edits recently).

So far, none of the news has described his conduct with the student as a crime. Rather its called misconduct.

However I am wondering why this person (student A) hasnt been charged with extortion. So far the only crime being alleged is Lying to the FBI and trying to circumvent bank reporting requirements.

(1) The age is not yet known, as far as I have heard.

(2) The failure to describe the conduct as a crime is a result of the lack of detail.

(3) There are a couple ideas floating around about that one. First is the possibility that there are charges coming. Second is the idea that if, say, Hastert offered to pay, it isn't blackmail.

―It is easy enough to speculate prosecutorial sympathy and trying to cut every technical break for a sex abuse survivor possible, but there is also talk that there may be "several" victims, and if it turns out Hastert went on to abuse other young men, empowered in part by this survivor preferring money to stopping a predator, that sympathy will start to evaporate quickly.​

Also, Joe pointed to statute of limitations, which would have been my first guess, but like other things, we're uncertain because the information isn't widely available. Depending on which law enforcement officer you are according to your job description, you might find your first priority here verifying the "several" to such a degree that profilers and behaviorists can recommend what happens next insofar as you might be opening a wider search for even more survivors. And if that's where we're at, we won't see any such charges until prosecutors think they can secure a conviction. Which, of course, leads back to limitations. Then again, if this gets bad enough, we might hear some people arguing to just let it go because "Low T" means Hastert isn't dangerous anymore. (No, seriously, this really could get that out of hand, given the state of our public discourse of sex crimes.)
 
How Hastert went from poor school teacher to multimillionaire while serving a public official:
In March 1999, soon after Hastert's elevation to the speakership, the Washington Post, in a front-page story, reported that Hastert "has begun offering industry lobbyists the kind of deal they like: private audiences where, for a price, they can voice their views on what kind of agenda the 106th Congress should pursue."[10] Hastert's style and extensive fundraising led Common Cause to critique the "pay-to-play system" in Congress.[10]
In 2000, Hastert announced he would support an Armenian Genocide resolution. Analysts noted that at the time there was a tight congressional race in California, in which the large Armenian community might be important in favor of the Republican incumbent. The resolution, vehemently opposed by Turkey, had passed the Human Rights Subcommittee of the House and the International Relations Committee but Hastert, although first supporting it, withdrew the resolution on the eve of the full House vote. He explained this by saying that he had received a letter from Bill Clinton asking him to withdraw it, because it would harm U.S. interests. Even though there is no evidence that a payment was made, an official at the Turkish Consulate is said to have claimed in one recording, that was translated by Sibel Edmonds, that the price for Hastert to withdraw the Armenian Genocide resolution would have been at least $500,000.[59][60]

A September 2005 article in Vanity Fair revealed that during her work, former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds had heard Turkish wiretap targets boast of covert relations with Hastert. The article states, "the targets reportedly discussed giving Hastert tens of thousands of dollars in surreptitious payments in exchange for political favors and information."[59] A spokesman for Hastert later denied the claims, relating them to the Jennifer Aniston-Brad Pitt breakup.[62] Following his congressional career, Hastert received a $35,000 per month contract lobbying on behalf of Turkey.[63]
In a December 2006, the House Ethics Committee determined that Hastert and other congressional leaders were "willfully ignorant" in responding to early warnings of the Mark Foley congressional page scandal, but did not violate any House rules.[64][65] In a committee statement, Kirk Fordham, who was Foley's chief of staff until 2005, said that he had alerted Scott B. Palmer, Hastert's chief of staff, to Foley's inappropriate advances toward congressional pages in 2002 or 2003, asking congressional leadership to intervene.[65] Then-House Majority Leader John Boehner and National Republican Congressional Committee chair Thomas M. Reynolds stated that they told Hastert about Foley's conduct in spring 2005.[65] A Hastert spokesman stated that "what Kirk Fordham said did not happen."[65] Hastert also stated that he could not recall conversations with Boehner and Reynolds, and that he did not learn of Foley's conduct until late September 2006, when the affair became public.[65]
In 2006, Hastert became embroiled in controversy over his championing of a $207-million federal earmark (inserted in the 2005 omnibus highway bill) for the Prairie Parkway, a proposed expressway running through his district.[66][67][68] The Sunlight Foundation accused Hastert of failing to disclose that the construction of the highway would benefit a land investment that Hastert and his wife made in nearby land in 2004 and 2005. Hastert received five-eighths of the proceeds of the sale of the land, turning a $1.8 million profit in under two years.[67][68][69] Hastert's ownership interest in the tract was not a public record because the land was held by a blind land trust, Little Rock Trust No. 225.[66] There were three partners in the trust: Hastert, Thomas Klatt, and Dallas Ingemunson. However, public documents only named Ingemunson, who was the Kendall County Republican Party chairman and Hastert's personal attorney and longtime friend.[66][69] Hastert denied any wrongdoing.[67] In October 2006, Norman Ornstein and Scott Lilly wrote that the Prairie Parkway affair was "worse than FoleyGate" and called for the Speaker's resignation.[70]
In 2012, after Hastert had departed from Congress, the highway project was killed after federal regulators retracted the 2008 approval of an environmental impact statement for the project and agreed to an Illinois Department of Transportation request to redirect the funds for other projects.[71] Environmentalists, who opposed the project, celebrated the cancellation of the project.[71] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Hastert#Controversies_during_term_as_Speaker
 
milkweed said:
However I am wondering why this person (student A) hasnt been charged with extortion.
Nothing I've seen would necessarily constitute extortion. Paying someone to keep information confidential is routine - Hastert neglected to write a non-disclosure clause into his escapades, and chose not to settle legally in court with an agreement to keep silence (as corporations faced with lawsuits for damages routinely do), and so he had to pay market rate.
 
(1) The age is not yet known, as far as I have heard.

(2) The failure to describe the conduct as a crime is a result of the lack of detail.

(3) There are a couple ideas floating around about that one. First is the possibility that there are charges coming. Second is the idea that if, say, Hastert offered to pay, it isn't blackmail.

―It is easy enough to speculate prosecutorial sympathy and trying to cut every technical break for a sex abuse survivor possible, but there is also talk that there may be "several" victims, and if it turns out Hastert went on to abuse other young men, empowered in part by this survivor preferring money to stopping a predator, that sympathy will start to evaporate quickly.​

1. And I cannot find where I thought I came across the senior reference.
2. Or it wasnt a crime. Age of consent seems to be somewhere between 16 and 17 best I've found and Illinois didnt make teacher/student sex a crime until many years after he had left the position.
3. True its unknown if Hastert offered to pay. But I dont think that matters:

Neither extortion nor blackmail requires a threat of a criminal act, such as violence, merely a threat used to elicit actions, money, or property from the object of the extortion. Such threats include the filing of reports (true or not) of criminal behavior to the police, revelation of damaging facts (such as pictures of the object of the extortion in a compromising position), etc.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion

The unnamed individual, who the indictment says Hastert has known almost his entire life, allegedly approached Hastert in 2010 and raised the issue of the past "misconduct". Based on this Hastert agreed to pay a person the indictment refers to as "Individual A" the sum of $3.5 million "in order to compensate for and conceal his prior misconduct against Individual A."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/this-isnt-pretty

At this time I would also point out Individual A seems to have kept his word at least until the FBI came a knocking.

Tiassa said:
―It is easy enough to speculate prosecutorial sympathy and trying to cut every technical break for a sex abuse survivor possible, but there is also talk that there may be "several" victims, and if it turns out Hastert went on to abuse other young men, empowered in part by this survivor preferring money to stopping a predator, that sympathy will start to evaporate quickly.​

Sex abuse survivor or consentual sex? 2010 - 30+ years later individual A decided to cash in. And Hastert quit the politics in 2007. 2010 was a rough year for a lot of people financially. ..

Prosecutorial sympathy or Grandstanding?
 
I think he played "touchy-feely" with a 17 or 18 year old male student. Whether this is $3.5 million "significant" or not depends on what you will lose if the story comes out.

Losing his current lobbying job would probably make it "significant".
 
I think he played "touchy-feely" with a 17 or 18 year old male student. Whether this is $3.5 million "significant" or not depends on what you will lose if the story comes out.

Losing his current lobbying job would probably make it "significant".
Well Hastert thought it was significant enough to pay 3.5 million to keep secret. So Hastert obviously felt he had a lot to loose. It has already cost him a lucrative lobbying job. That is awfully expensive touchy-feely if that is what it was.
 
It has now been reported there were multiple kids involved and the sexual abuse extended over the course of several years.
 
Sex abuse survivor or consentual sex? 2010 - 30+ years later individual A decided to cash in. And Hastert quit the politics in 2007. 2010 was a rough year for a lot of people financially. ..
It was also the time that Hastert cashed in and had big bucks to spare, as well as being the first time Hastert was out of the public eye and presumably able to make large cash payments to somebody without causing a stir.

The guy may not have anticipated the degree of incompetence Hastert exhibited - Hastert has led a life of entitlement for decades, never had to develop financial survival skills, and lost the wariness of the at risk. He's got a lot of money, but he never had to actually earn it, or manage it under threat by hostile forces and enemies.

I think he played "touchy-feely" with a 17 or 18 year old male student. Whether this is $3.5 million "significant" or not depends on what you will lose if the story comes out.
If it was only one student, and never involved oral or anal penetration, and never went below the age of 17/18, and never happened again once he was a Congressman with any boy, Hastert was a truly unique, one of a kind pedarast. I've never heard of another like him.
 
For some reason, I am under the impression this person was a senior. Not sure why, may have been a wiki point thats no longer there (many edits recently).

So far, none of the news has described his conduct with the student as a crime. Rather its called misconduct.

However I am wondering why this person (student A) hasnt been charged with extortion. So far the only crime being alleged is Lying to the FBI and trying to circumvent bank reporting requirements.
Well now there is another allegation which was alleged to have begun during his freshman year and lasted throughout his high school experience.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/excl...tert-sex-abuse-victim-named/story?id=31530828
 
Those We Have Left Behind

Disgrace: Speaker Hastert probably hoped 17 November 2006 would be his worst day.

This is important.

Jolene said she asked her brother why he never told anyone. "And he just turned around and kind of looked at me and said, 'Who is ever going to believe me?'"

‡​

Jolene said she believes the abuse ended when Steve moved away after his high school graduation in 1971. Reinboldt died of AIDS in 1995. She believes Hastert's alleged actions irrevocably changed Steve's life for the worse.

(ABC News↱)

These two circumstances are not unrelated.

This is what it does.

This is why. This is why we do not equivocate. This is why we do not excuse. This is why we do not minimize. This is what we do, and this is how we know we are making mistakes.

These are the people we have lost along the way.

These are the people we have left behind.

This is every day.

____________________

Notes:

Ross, Brian, Rhonda Schwartz, and John Capell. "Exclusive: Alleged Dennis Hastert Sex Abuse Victim Named by Family". ABC News. 5 June 2015. ABCNews.Go.com. 5 June 2015. http://abcn.ws/1APOFZ7
 
This is important.

Jolene said she asked her brother why he never told anyone. "And he just turned around and kind of looked at me and said, 'Who is ever going to believe me?'"

Jolene said she believes the abuse ended when Steve moved away after his high school graduation in 1971. Reinboldt died of AIDS in 1995. She believes Hastert's alleged actions irrevocably changed Steve's life for the worse.


(ABC News↱)

From the same article:
Steve Reinboldt’s sister Jolene said she first learned of her late brother’s purported years-long sexual abuse at the hands of the future Speaker of the House back in 1979 when her brother revealed to her that he was gay and had been out of high school for eight years.

“I asked him, when was your first same sex experience. He looked at me and said, ‘It was with Dennis Hastert,’” Jolene said. “I was stunned."

Doesnt make sense. When was your first sex experience and the answer is a persons name?
“[Steve] just told me the basics. I believed him 100 percent. But he never went into any details -– where it happened, or what the sexual experiences were like, anything like that,” Jolene said.

Now I have no doubt the sister misses her brother and likely wishes he had not been gay. But he was and she seems to still struggle with that aspect:
She believes Hastert’s alleged actions irrevocably changed Steve's life for the worse.

She doesnt quite come out and say "Hastert made my brother gay".

In a different article:

"I was hanging out at Steve's house in December 1974, I seem to recall we went for a drive and he told me that he was gay. He also said that his first sexual encounter was with Denny Hastert," the friend said.

The friend said he was "flabbergasted" by the disclosure.

"I said what do you mean, and he said well, we would do things sexually and it would sometimes start with a massage," the friend added.

He said Reinboldt did not give any other details about his sexual contact with Hastert beyond that it happened when he was a student.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...e-victim-steve-reinboldt-named-family-n370386

Steve doesnt sound bitter about his tryst with Hastert. And how old do you have to be to know your gay?

Yorkville is a city located in Kendall County, Illinois, United States. The population was 6,189 at the 2000 United States Census and had grown to 16,921 as of the 2010 census. It is the county seat of Kendall County.

Seems Hasterts gaydar worked just fine.... Too bad Steve moved away. Might not have gotten aids if he would have kept hanging with Hastert.
 
milkweed said:
Doesnt make sense. When was your first sex experience and the answer is a persons name?
That's what my answer would be. What doesn't make sense about it?
milkweed said:
Now I have no doubt the sister misses her brother and likely wishes he had not been gay. But he was and she seems to still struggle with that aspect:
So what does that have to do with Hastert? Are you explaining the secrecy?
milkweed said:
She doesnt quite come out and say "Hastert made my brother gay".
Let's say this presumption of yours turns out to have been the case. What's your point? That Steve was probably right to keep his trysts with Hastert down low, given the ignorance and bigotry that surrounded him even in his own family?

The more significant aspect is the passing mention of the time frame: "Throughout his high school years".
Steve doesnt sound bitter about his tryst with Hastert. And how old do you have to be to know your gay?
Some know at puberty, a few even earlier. Are you suggesting it was OK for coach and teacher Hastert to screw high school boys if they already knew they were gay?

I think Hastert is toast. I predict a suicide.
If he was going to kill himself from guilt or shame, one imagines he would have already - years ago. This guy acts as though he feels entitled to whatever he can get, in general, and victimized or abused by anyone who objects.

This is a guy who buddied with Newt Gingrich, Lindsey Graham, and the like - the Contract with America crowd. He was part of the philandering House leadership that impeached Bill Clinton. Shame is not really in his repertoire.
 
Beltway Memories

Iceaura said:
If he was going to kill himself from guilt or shame, one imagines he would have already - years ago. This guy acts as though he feels entitled to whatever he can get, in general, and victimized or abused by anyone who objects.

This is a guy who buddied with Newt Gingrich, Lindsey Graham, and the like - the Contract with America crowd. He was part of the philandering House leadership that impeached Bill Clinton. Shame is not really in his repertoire.

Mark Plotkin's↱ article for The Hill is interesting, ostensibly about a judicial conflict of interest that is ultimately buried in the tenth paragraph ("One additional matter must be covered ..."). The first nine are dedicated to a recollection of Mr. Hastert:

Much has been written about Hastert's political career. Most of the stories relate to his being elected Speaker because he was "squeaky clean" and had no "skeletons in his closet." The Republican Party at that time had a serious image problem.

Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) had to leave the Speakership in 1998 because he had a host of embarrassing and scandalous revelations. Bob Livingston (R-La.) had to resign the post when he admitted to extramarital affairs. The next in line, Tom DeLay (R-Texas), was so toxic that he couldn't possibly be Speaker. So because of all this, Hastert, the supposed mild-mannered teddy bear kind of guy, was elevated. He soon became known as the "Accidental Speaker."

He goes on to tell a story about how the Speaker once answered a question about the Statuary Hall, concluding unkindly:

Hastert's true point of view, I believe, was blurted out. His world is not one that includes, but rather excludes. After this brief exchange with Hastert, I came to realize that this individual was not worthy of the title or position of Speaker.

Talk about an ouch.

Still, despite my disdain for the hyped part of the hypocrisy discussion, it really is worth recalling Mr. Hastert's symbolic value.

The case already appears to have a peripheral death toll; the environment in which such survivors must attempt to recover is, as you point out, difficult, and was even more so at the time. If we get anything out of this, let it be that. We can't keep leaving people behind like this.

Rape culture is presently on full display in the United States. Mr. Hastert is now an icon of that horror. He was supposed to be a symbol of anything but.

And that is a riddle that will probably keep me paying attention to the hypocrisy.

There is yet to come a, "How did this happen?" moment.

Watch for it.

And then duck.

It's going to hurt, I'm pretty sure.
____________________

Notes:

Plotkin, Mark. "The Hastert case's judicial conflict of interest". The Hill. 5 June 2015. TheHill.com. 6 June 2015. http://bit.ly/1JtRDFx
 
Back
Top