Discussion: Dennis Hastert Reportedly Tells Associates 'I Am A Victim, Too'

TPM Article Topics
1

Discussion for article #236963

2

Hastert / Duggar…“What about ME? Won’t somebody think of ME? ~BooHoo! BooHoo!~!”

These depraved, disgusting, whiny Con and Bagger Republican pedophiles are true exemplars of “The Party of Personal Responsibility,” huh?
Republicans and Conservatives think nothing of spending 60-70 million dollars on a stupid quest to the ends of the earth over stains on a blue dress, but shining the spotlight on damned child molesters like Hastert and Duggar is a ~gasp!~ witch hunt!

FOX News defense in a nutshell: “Won’t somebody think of the child molesters!”

18 Likes
3

Unfortunately he won’t suffer nearly as much as he probably should.

6 Likes
4

“I am a victim, too,”
… Yeah … that’s why you agreed to pay this guy $3.5 million to not talk about what YOU did to him

16 Likes
5

How long before a FOX news reader/gasbag opens a GoFundMe page for Denny?

I can just hear Megyn Kelly: “Haven’t we all molested a kid or two?” Geraldo (whose head is as empty as Al Capone’s vault) has already said that “…the embarrassment is enough.” And that odious cesspool of Righties and Baggers apologists ran to the Duggars’ defense as well.
F*ck that bunch of pedophile enablers at FOX.

16 Likes
6

Well if he is a victim and it is blackmail then he first should have told the FBI instead of lie to them and 2nd my understanding is they can not charge for blackmail unless they have a cooperative victim and Hastert is not cooperating. So victim…I think not.

9 Likes
7

Well, if he was blackmailed, technically he is a “victim”, true. Jeff Dahmer was killed in prison, so he was also a “victim”. Just not sure what the relevance is? Both of them still committed crimes against others that were far worse than those perpetrated against them.

3 Likes
8

Another perp following a stupid script in the search for pity and expiation of guilt. Is it too late for him to effect a Stand Your Ground defense? Or the IOKIYAR defense?

1 Like
9

Should Individual A get to keep the money?

10

Of course he is. Tune in to the Fox Special to learn how this is all O’Bummer’s fault.

6 Likes
11

Denny’s been Duggaring again.

1 Like
12

All the LOLS!!! He’s a “victim” just like the person who murdered his parents and is now an orphan was a “victim”, too!

Gee, that didn’t take long, did it? Less than a week from when the news first broke, he claims he was a victim, too.

Holy mackerel! The sheer depravity is numbing, isn’t it?

8 Likes
13

GOP: Always the “victims”!

4 Likes
14

That defense is only mounted by the Beltway stenographer corps on their behalf.
The conservatives do take advantage of it. They assume it’s the default mode, which is always a safe bet.

2 Likes
15

Maybe when he was first approached, it was pure blackmail & the word ‘victim’ could be included , however once Hastert became a participant in formalizing the arrangement & the terms & the covert method of payment - and it slid over toward the ‘quid pro quo’ - Hastert essentially converted it into a business arrangement. Remember when there was a guy attempting to blackmail Letterman? Well Letterman could have tried to pay the guy off - but instead he made the smartest move under the circumstances - he went to the police.

1 Like
16

Republican are ALWAYS victims. It’s part of the brand.

6 Likes
17

apparently blackmail is not involved. according to Sneed’s column today’s SunTimes the abuse victim did not extort Denny. it seems Denny offered the $$ to ease his conscious.

4 Likes
18

If it was blackmail, no. But if Hastert volunteered the money without being asked, and had withdrawn it legally, indeed he should then be allowed to keep it. But in this case it appears to be blackmail, so not likely. But the Feds also might have made a deal with him in exchange for info, who knows.

1 Like
19

Whether or not blackmail was intended, the money was being used to buy this person’s silence. I would assume failure to continue to remit payment would alter the terms of the agreement. And even if the terms were completely amicable (remember we are talking about a former recipient of illicit sexual contact), the promise of silence suggests coercion. Coercing a person into withholding information can be a crime, even if the form of coercion is millions of dollars in cash.

20

Under US Law:
“Whoever, under a threat of informing, or as a consideration for not informing, against any violation of any law of the United States, demands or receives any money or other valuable thing, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”

He received money, and it appears it was part of a threat for sure. So that’s blackmail, not a business arrangement. Now if Hastert just approached him and offered money, that’s different. But that makes no sense, for him to do that after all these years. BUT, the Feds could easily let the guy off for getting the info on Hastert. And that’s fine by me. The Feds view could be that this guy was violated big time by Denny, and although the blackmail was not legal, they understand the motive, and agreed not to press charges as long as the guy gave up Denny. Very plausible.

Now, another interesting scenario. Did this guy report these payments to the IRS as income or gifts? That’s a lot of money.