This is where your use of “supposed victim” starts getting wery, wery suspicious.
OTOH, perhaps Hastert was just paying off a very, very bet from his coaching days. With interest. A BET THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH SALACIOUS ACTIVITIES NOSIRREEBOB.
… follow the money?
Slacktivist has a good post on the subject. He points out the link to corruption:
OK, yes, a sex scandal is not the same thing as “public corruption or
a corruption scandal.” But when a sex scandal leads to extortion, that
distinction goes away. A politician who is willing to pay someone
millions of dollars to keep quiet may also be a politician who is
willing to vote or deregulate or administer their duties in a way that
favors those leveraging their secrets against them. And that is the very
definition of public corruption.The alleged sex or sexual abuse
Hastert was paying to keep secret occurred before his time in office. He
was keeping that secret throughout all of his years in office. There is
no sense in which that secret can be said to have “nothing to do with”
his time in office.It’s certainly possible to be in public office
while keeping secrets that one does not wish the public to know without
being corrupt. But when they’re the kind of secrets for which one is
willing to pay millions in hush-money, then they’re also the kind of
secrets that one might be willing to exchange political favors to keep.
That’s corruption.And speaking of corruption, how is it that a
former high school teacher and coach, who then spent decades in
Congress, amassed the kind of personal fortune that enabled him to agree
to pay some $3.5 million to keep his secrets hidden? Hastert,
apparently, made his fortune by speculating in real estate — including
several deals in which his investment paid off due to congressional
action, suggesting there wasn’t really anything speculative about them.
After his time in Congress, he went on to a lucrative career as a
lobbyist — the revolving door through which corporations are able to
write a big thank-you check to former congressmen for their years of
faithful service. I don’t see how that has “nothing to do with public
corruption or a corruption scandal” either.
3 Likes
Especially since there has already been documented evidence (though as yet no formal criminal charges) that Hastert accepted bribes in exchange for said legislative action. Particularly the money he supposedly took from Turkey in exchange for killing the Armenian Genocide resolution.
One reason nobody has yet been able to prove those allegations is the lack of a money trail, but if those hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes were paid in cash and passed directly on to his blackmailer then there wouldn’t be any bank records. One corrupt deed to conceal another.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
