Discussion for article #236888
I guess Boehner may need to rebrand the Hastert Rule.
31 Likes
Kind of sparse with the details, so âŚ
"From CNBC
Former Speaker of the House John Dennis Hastert was charged Thursday with structuring cash withdrawals to evade currency transactions reporting requirements and lying to the FBI, according to the U.S. Attorney in Chicago.
He was charged with structuring a cash withdrawal of $952,000 so as to get around the rule that banks must report such transactions over $10,000. The charges also allege that he lied to the FBI about his actions.
Hastert, a Republican who served as a congressman Illinois, was the Speaker of the House from 1999 to 2007."
3 Likes
Raises some interesting questions, doesnât it? Other than a major drug dealer, or someone planning on engaging in some serious bribery, who needs that much cash?
7 Likes
Donât you just love it when one of these corrupt Republicans get caught with his pants down, no reference to Larry Craig or Airport bathroom attendants intendedâŚ
10 Likes
Republican values suck.
5 Likes
Hmmm, who would need a million dollars in cash?
7 Likes
Popcorn futures just exploded.
Knew I should have invested more heavily. Hmmmm. Might still be able to get in on it before the news goes completely viral âŚ
6 Likes
we donât know why he was paying $3.5M to Mr. A, though⌠fascinating
here come the conservatives with âoh yeah? What about Clinton?â
12 Likes
Do you think Johnny-Boy feels like he just got a visit from the Ghost of Speaker Future? First Newt, now Dennis. I see a pattern developing here.
ETA: And, as itâs been pointed out, Livingstone too!
3 Likes
Ah, this proves beyond a doubtâŚthere is a God! And she is pissed at Denny! Wow, more Illinois 'Pub politicians now behind bars or soon to be.
I love it!
6 Likes
The full indictment is short reading, and makes things at least somewhat clearer: https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2089603/hastert-indictment.pdf
So he was âstructuringâ to hide the fact that he was being shaken down by someone, not to evade taxes, which is usually the reason for doing so. Still no telling who âIndividual Aâ is, of course.
Edit: And as is so often the case, itâs lying to the Feds about it thatâs going to cook his goose.
4 Likes
Mistress? Baby? Boyfriend?
3 Likes
The question, I think, is better phrased along the lines of: âWhy did he need to get that much cash out of the banking system in a manner that would be invisible âŚ?â
Try to imagine making, at minimum, over 950 transactions (in addition to any and all other normal transactions to run your life. He had to have been doing this for the past several years, probably with conspirators and stooges to hide it under various shells.
I doubt Iâve made that many transactions in ten years, because that would be 95/year ⌠about two per week ⌠it would be near my upper limit.
[ EDIT to note: Ahhhh. that link you provided to the actual indictment. Being shaken down ⌠oh boy. The popcorn train is just beginning to roll on this one. My other comments about the length of time this has been taking place still stand, though, ]
Apparently, according to Political Wire, Hastert withdrew the money in small increments so as not to be detected by the IRS, to pay âsomeone he committed âprior misconductâ withâŚâ
4 Likes
Man, he really wanted to keep something from getting out. $3.5 million is a lot of money.
FYI - this is why we have banking cash transaction reporting requirements, folks.
7 Likes
Thatâs the part I donât get. If I agree to pay you $X to compensate you for some sort of damage I have caused you, the IRS doesnât really have anything to do with it. Itâs not subject to gift tax, and I donât think itâs reportable income for Individual A.
Edit: Some quick checking reveals that these payments are almost certainly reportable income for Individual A.
1 Like
Obviously that brings the next question. Why was he being shaken down?
Structuring is not a old law, probably only 20 years. Would be interesting to find out if he voted for it.
If you deposit or withdrawal 10k in cash, you must fill out a form. If you want to avoid the form, you take it out in increments of $9999. Thatâs whatâs illegal.
Yes, I understand that. But the IRS has nothing to do with it. This is not an issue of taxation, AFAIK.