disclose, denny

Hastert out.

2007-11-16T10:17:00.000+11:00

"Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert bid his colleagues farewell in a final speech Thursday, expressing worry about the "breakdown of civility" in politics.

Hastert, 65, became the longest-serving Republican speaker of the House in history after taking the post in January 1999. The Illinois lawmaker stepped down as the top House Republican leader after Democrats won a majority in the 2006 midterm elections, ending 12 years of GOP control.

During his farewell address, the former high school history teacher and wrestling coach offered one bit of analysis about his tenure in Congress. "I continue to worry about the breakdown of civility in our political discourse," Hastert said. "I tried my best, but I wish I had been more successful."

Although he did not announce the date of his House departure, an aide to Hastert says the former speaker will retire by the end of the year.

Hastert, who forged a reputation for his ability to form compromises, said lawmakers "have a responsibility to be civil, open-minded and fair -- to listen to one another and work in good faith to find solutions to the challenges facing our nation."

Lawmakers have a responsibility not to take bribes from foreign interests.

Hastert Rules Out Another Run

2007-08-15T14:23:00.000+10:00

From the Washington Post:

"Rep. J. Dennis Hastert (Ill.), who last year became the longest-serving Republican speaker of the House, will announce Friday that he will not seek reelection, Republican House aides said yesterday.

GOP aides say that Hastert is likely to serve out the rest of his term, but that he has been considering resigning from the House this year. If he did, Hastert would trigger a special election that could give an indication of whether Democrats are continuing their political surge or whether Republicans have stanched the bleeding in GOP-leaning districts."

No mention on whether he is about to be indicted.

Hastert: I hate competition!

2007-05-06T19:26:00.000+10:00

Hysterical. I missed this LTE from Hastert to the Chig Sun Times, April 26 (in full):

At a time when recent trends in youth drug use have shown a significant downturn, I was disturbed by your recent editorial "Legalize medical marijuana" in support of state legislation to permit the growth of marijuana for medical purposes.

As a former schoolteacher and coach and father of two, I believe in giving our kids a drug-free future. Illegal drugs are responsible for the loss of 17,000 American lives annually, and marijuana is by far the most used and abused of these drugs. More kids use marijuana than cocaine, heroin, ecstasy and all other illicit drugs combined. Legislation that allows, supports or recognizes marijuana as a medicine is irresponsible, shortsighted and sends the wrong message to our youth.

There is absolutely no sound scientific evidence that marijuana has any medicinal value. The Food and Drug Administration is the only agency that can designate a substance as a medicine and to date has not done so. Marijuana continues to be a Schedule I Controlled Substance, and its use under federal law, for any reason, is a crime.

It is clear that if this bill becomes law, it would undermine the medical integrity and safeguards established by the federal drug approval process, compromise law enforcement efforts to combat drug trafficking, and endanger public health and safety. Legalization of any kind will also have unintended consequences: each person injured in driving and work-related accidents committed by those under the influence, and unborn babies harmed by abusing mothers.

I urge the General Assembly to think twice about supporting legislation that softens the stance that marijuana is dangerous, addictive and illegal. I would hope that everyone could agree that there is no legitimate place in our society for marijuana use.

For fisking of the letter, see DrugWarRant @ Salon.

Remember, Daniel Ellsberg:

"Sibel says that suitcases of cash have been delivered to the Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, at his home, near Chicago, from Turkish sources, knowing that a lot of that is drug money.

Now these are pretty inflammatory allegations, let's say, and it's note-worthy that they haven't even been picked up by the mainstream press. The Vanity Fair article made that plain, though not in as much detail as the antiwar.com interviews - but not one major newspaper I don't think has picked up her allegations against Hastert which are very specific, and one would think very important."

Hastert: Most Corrupt

2006-12-23T08:11:00.000+11:00

* RawStory:

"The advocacy group Judicial Watch released a list today of “Washington's 'Ten Most Corrupt Politicians' for 2006.” In a final swipe at Republican leadership in the last Congress, the list, as acquired by RAW STORY, singles out more Republicans than Democrats.

Judicial Watch describes itself as "a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation, [that] promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law."

This year, according to the group, six of the most corrupt Washington politicians were Republicans whose names are often identified with the scandals widely believed to have contributed to the Democratic victory in the November midterms: Lobbyist Jack Abramoff, Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA), Rep. Tom Delay (R-TX), Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL), Rep. Denny Hastert (R-IL), and Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH)."

Hastert is the only one who still has a job, so far.

URGING INVESTIGATION INTO SPEAKER HASTERT’S LAND DEAL

2006-11-29T01:42:00.000+11:00

CREW

CREW SENDS LETTER TO DOJ URGING INVESTIGATION INTO SPEAKER HASTERT’S LAND DEAL

CREW Questions Hastert Earmark – Demands Reform

Washington, DC – Earlier today, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) asked the Department of Justice (DOJ) to investigate whether Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) violated the law by inserting an earmark into the 2005 Highway Bill that earned him a 500% profit on a lucrative land deal.

As reported in the Chicago Tribune, in August 2002, Speaker Hastert purchased 179 acres of land, inaccessible by road, in Kendall County, Illinois for $925,000, or $5,200 per acre. Then, in February 2004, Speaker Hastert formed a real estate trust with two other land buyers and purchased 69 acres of land adjacent to the original parcel at a cost of $1,033,000, or $15,000 per acre. The trust’s 69 acres was then joined with 69 acres of Speaker Hastert’s land.

The land purchased by the trust was more valuable than Speaker Hastert’s property because it was accessible by road.

In the summer of 2005, the Federal Highway Bill was enacted containing a $207 million earmark inserted by Rep. Hastert for construction of the Prairie Parkway. While the earmark was sufficient only to build about one-third of the entire 36 mile parkway, the language of the legislation mandated that construction take place on the portion of the parkway nearest to Speaker Hastert’s property.

As reported in The New Republic, four months after the bill was signed into law, the trust’s 138 acres was sold to a developer for $4,989,000 or $36,152 an acre. The partners apportioned the proceeds of the sale according to the acreage each had contributed. Thus, Speaker Hastert was credited with 62% ownership on the supposition that his $5,200 per acre land was equal in value to the partnership’s $15,000 per acre land with the result that he received $3,118,000 of the proceeds. While Rep. Hastert’s partners each made a 144% profit on their investment, Speaker Hastert’s profit was 500% of his original investment.

Melanie Sloan, CREW’s executive director, stated, “Speaker Hastert’s use of the earmarking process to increase his own property value is an egregious abuse of his legislative authority. The Department of Justice should immediately investigate this sweetheart deal.”

Sloan continued, “Congressional leaders have promised that the first order of business in January will be to enact ethics legislation. Any reform package must include a provision prohibiting members from inserting earmarks for their own personal financial benefit.”

The request for investigation and supporting documents are available at CREW’s website.

Speaker Hastert was included in the watch list of CREW's September 2006 report, "Beyond DeLay: The 20 most corrupt members of Congress (and five to watch)."

***

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is a non-profit legal watchdog group dedicated to holding public officials accountable for their actions.

Hastert for UN?

2006-11-21T20:29:00.000+11:00

Foreign Policy:

The List: Who Will Replace John Bolton?

John Bolton is the most controversial U.S. ambassador to the United Nations in history. But, to the delight of his critics, his temporary appointment is nearing expiration. With congressional Democrats in charge, President Bush won’t have the votes to send Bolton back to New York. Or will he? This week’s FP List considers the contenders for Bolton’s spot.
[snip]
The Longshot

Dennis Hastert, Republican congressman from Illinois

Why he’ll get the post: The outgoing Speaker of the House is already rumored to be at the top of Bush’s list to become the next ambassador to Japan. Hastert has said publicly that the 2007–2008 term will be his last, and there’s a chance the president will encourage him to step down early in order to go to Turtle Bay instead of Tokyo. That way, Bush can stick it to the Democrats who scuttled the Bolton nomination by appointing someone who equally raises partisan hackles.

Why he won’t: Hastert is politically polarizing. Critics call him a defender of congressional corruption. He was recently called out for his handling of the Mark Foley sex scandal and was a little too close for comfort to Jack Abramoff. Plus, his foreign-policy experience is thin. He briefly served on the House subcommittee tasked with national security, hardly a stand-out resume for the country’s top diplomat.

Please, please, please let Hastert be nominated, and soon.

Hastert & Abramoff: the payoff

2006-11-05T12:32:00.000+11:00

* n0madic has the details of Hastert's double dealing re indian casions. i hadn't ever really appreciated why Hastert was the number one beneficiary of Abramoff's cash. great work n0madic. more on hastert at The Real Denny.

Ellsberg: Hastert got suitcases of Al Qaeda heroin cash, should be in jail

2006-10-25T09:46:00.000+10:00

Over at DU, Randy mentioned an ' untranscribed interview between Ellsberg and Kris Welch of KPFA from Sept. '05'' - I actually hadn't heard it before (dammit!) - so I found it, and it is no longer 'untranscribed' (at least the Sibel related bits.)

Daniel Ellsberg said that Dennis Hastert received suitcases of cash at his home from Turkish heroin money and that Hastert should be in jail, along with his friends.

He also says that people in the State Department, and in nuclear labs, are paid in 'cold cash' for secrets that are sold on the nuclear black market.

He also says that a Dem Congress "could be pressed into holding genuine investigations of the torture, of the corruption, getting rid of Hastert, and starting impeachment proceedings."

All errors are mine, some snippage, usual disclaimers, etc.

---------------------------------

Kris Welch: I know you just met with Sibel Edmonds - what's the key thing about Sibel Edmonds' case?

Daniel Ellsberg: For several years, Sibel has been really hoping to get her case into a court, or into a hearing room in Congress. That's pretty well impossible with Republicans in charge of hearings - they won't hold any. She has told her story on a classified basis to several congressional venues, plus the 911 Commission - none of whom have done anything with it so far - it's too hot for them, essentially. You get a pretty good clue as to why the congressional people haven't pressed it in the article about her in the current Vanity Fair issue. Sibel is not yet in a position to tell all, but has been telling more and more.

Let me suggest two interviews with her that have come out since the VF article that go a good deal further than VF chose to print. VF did print ten pages and they got a lot but there was a lot that the reporter had, David Rose, that didn't get into the article, and a lot of that is in these two other interviews - both at antiwar.com, Chris Deliso and Scott Horton. In those interviews she finally reveals more of what she wished that VF had put out. Namely, if I can summarize it quickly, Al Qaeda, she's been saying to congress, according to these interviews, is financed 95% by drug money - drug traffic to which the US government shows a blind eye, has been ignoring, because it very heavily involves allies and assets of ours - such as Turkey, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Pakistan, Afghanistan - all the 'Stans - in a drug traffic where the opium originates in Afghanistan, is processed in Turkey, and delivered to Europe where it furnishes 96% of Europe's heroin, by Albanians, either in Albania or Kosovo - Albanian Muslims in Kosovo - basically the KLA, the Kosovo Liberation Army which we backed heavily in that episode at the end of the century.

It was known at the time that the KLA consisted largely of drug-dealers, and they still do. They're dominating the politics, pretty much, of Kosovo right now. Now, all of these people are, for various reasons, allies, or clients, of the US - and the fact that they get a large amount of their income from the heroin trade is something the US just regards as the price of doing business with them. That means that not only is the heroin coming into our markets where it furnishes, according to Sibel based on her FBI experience, some 14% of our heroin - up from 4% before the invasion of Afghanistan.

The major effect of that is that terrorist gangs are taking a cut of this, including Al Qaeda, which essentially taxes this traffic as it goes through the various lands where each 'band' pays a percentage as they hand it off. In other words, the US is in effect, endorsing - well, 'endorsing' is too strong a word - 'permitting', definitely permitting, or 'not acting against,' a heroin trade - which not only corrupts our cities and our city politics, AND our congress, as Sibel makes very specific - but is financing the terrorist organization that constitutes a genuine threat to us. And this seems to be a fact that is accepted by our top leaders, according to Sibel, for various geopolitical reasons, and for corrupt reasons as well. Sometimes things are simpler than they might appear - and they involve envelopes of cash. Sibel says that suitcases of cash have been delivered to the Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, at his home, near Chicago, from Turkish sources, knowing that a lot of that is drug money.

Now these are pretty inflammatory allegations, let's say, and it's note-worthy that they haven't even been picked up by the mainstream press. The Vanity Fair article made that plain, though not in as much detail as the antiwar.com interviews - but not one major newspaper I don't think has picked up her allegations against Hastert which are very specific, and one would think very important.

Kris Welch: Dennis Hastert's name is mentioned in the Vanity Fair article issue...

Daniel Ellsberg: Yes - but in another connection - namely that he sold a legislative move of removing from a vote a resolution that he had earlier backed, raising the price, of course, of removing it - condemning Turkish genocide of Armenians.

And for the first time, a legislative leader (Hastert) had backed such a resolution which meant that it went through the committee for the first time, and was headed for a vote - in order to help a Republican in Glendale, near Los Angeles, James Rogan, who had a large Armenian constituency. So all things were moving ahead, at last, after many years of them trying to do this, and at the last moment, Hastert removed it from the vote, removed it from the calendar - and according to the information claimed by Sibel, Turkish sources were claiming to have achieved this for a price of half a million dollars - paid to Hastert. Again, this would seem a story that... certainly the Armenians are picking it up, as they should.

Kris Welch: Well, and the Turks in Turkey are now attacking Sibel Edmonds

Daniel Ellsberg: Sibel is an 'enemy of Turkey' - she was a Turkish citizen, now an American, but she has some family in Turkey who are now threatened by this exposure. Her picture was on the front-page of every Turkish newspaper - denouncing her as a 'whore,' as a 'traitor' and a turncoat of various kinds and she's had many threatening letters, including death threats. So it's a very serious situation for her, and the contrast between the news in Turkey, and the silence in America about allegations about Dennis Hastert, the Speaker of the House, is quite a contrast.

Kris Welch: And, of course, she complains in the antiwar.com interviews that the VF article chose to focus on this Armenian story - which is not the story - and that's her problem. She says when the media does do anything about her story, they focus on 'oh - here's this poor whistleblower' instead of focusing on what the facts of her whistleblowing might be.

Daniel Ellsberg: Well, I think it's true that - as my friend and mentor Peter Dale Scott has said to me over the last 20 years or more - the American media maintain an almost unbroken silence on the connection between US policy and the drug trade, specifically the CIA and the drug trade. The silence is broken, typically, only to dismiss it, only to say 'No - there's nothing to this.' The 911 Commission, for instance, as Peter pointed out to me, went out of it's way simply to say that there was no connection between 911 and drug connections at all. Now, according to Sibel, that's absolutely wrong - that the connections through Turkey, in various ways, are very important.

Kris Welch: OK - and Sibel got this information because she applied for this after 911, wanting to do something real for her American patriotism - this is what she says she was motivated by...

Daniel Ellsberg: She is very patriotic...

Kris Welch: And these wiretaps that she translated went back to 1997... so she heard all these conversations, people bragging that they'd given this money

Daniel Ellsberg: Yes - these were people from the American Turkish Council - which is a quote 'lobbying group' - or as she has described it up till now, as a 'semi-legitimate organization'

Kris Welch: And Brent Scowcroft is on the board of directors?

Daniel Ellsberg: Yes. Brent Scowcroft is the head of board of directors - every member of the military industrial complex - Lockheed, Raytheon - everybody who does business with Turkey is a member of this group. That doesn't necessarily mean that they know... well, there's a great deal of arms trading...

Kris Welch: and that's where a lot of this money comes from too..

Daniel Ellsberg: and a lot of that is as legitimate as arms trading ever is - as merchants of death - but it's a legal trade, perhaps unfortunately - but aside from that, there's a great deal of dealing of information in illicit arms trades including, she says, nuclear information, from our nuclear weapons labs - for which cold cash is paid - to people in the labs, and to people, she says, to people in the State Department - who have essentially given 'OKs' for various trades, or have turned a blind eye - deliberately - to it. So there are messages in these wiretaps about people getting thousands of dollars - this is small potatoes - but in the State Department they come cheap apparently!

Kris Welch: As Sibel says, the State Department is the most corrupt element of our government

Daniel Ellsberg: Yes - and that's an amazing statement (laughs) when you consider the competition. I myself was amazed to hear that, and I told her that, because my sense of foreign service officers, and the State Department in general, was that they had many flaws, and many limitations, but I would have said that corruption was not part of that...

Kris Welch: And relatively speaking, they're "the good guys" with the recent foreign policy

Daniel Ellsberg: Well, it depends who's in charge. Under Powell, to a degree, they were sidelined, they had essentially no influence. But when they're 'good'...

Kris Welch: ...They're impotent

Daniel Ellsberg: Good children are meant to be seen not heard!

But Sibel said, very flatly, and she's extremely credible to me, she said 'That's just flatly wrong. People in the State Department take cash.' Now, since she's a person who has been checked out a good deal by some of the senators she's talked to - Senator Leahy, Senator Grassley, Republican, they have always said, repeatedly, that she's extremely credible. The FBI agents we've talked to have, in every respect that was raised, have confirmed her story - that she's a very credible witness. Representative Waxman, to whose staff she's spoken has said the same. So she is very credible. That's a fact. So when she says things like this, they do deserve to get picked up and followed up, and they are not being.

Kris Welch: Well, and her credibility might have something to do with the fact that she has been completely silenced, she says the most gagged person in history, by this very little used States Secrets privilege

[SNIP - for 20 minutes Ellsberg discusses martial law & the shredding of the constitution, 'the next 911, the Reichstag fire')

Daniel Ellsberg: It's very important to get the Republicans out before the next 911 - there's one process for doing that. I think the stuff that Sibel Edmonds is talking about - it's absolutely appropriate to get rid of Dennis Hastert, the Speaker of the House and put him in jail, actually, and to lose him his job, and some other people.

If people will press their congress representatives - and I suppose Armenian people are already doing this, because they were directly stabbed by Hastert on this point - but the whole country, of course, needs to be concerned about Dennis Hastert. I will believe Sibel on this - that he is guilty - well, let me put it this way, he's innocent till proven guilty. I believe he has earned the right to a fair trial - probably several fair trials! And I hope he really gets them - along with Rove - he's another person who seems to have earned the right to a fair trial, as have Scooter Libby and others.

That will hamstring the administration, but not get us out of Iraq. I would hope that the scandal the Republicans have earned in this, if it can be pursued, would get us what otherwise seemed impossible, a Democratic congress, a Democratic House which can impeach. The only way to impeach Bush is to get a Democratic House in 2006 - and just putting Democrats alone in, of course, doesn't get us out of Iraq. Putting John Kerry in, I don't think, would have got us out of Iraq. We definitely need a new bunch of Democrats in there - and new leaders. I'm very pleased to see Feingold, the one senator who had the guts to vote against the PATRIOT Act - just as Barbara Lee was the one person in congress to vote against the original delegation of power to the president after 911. One person in each case, like Cindy Sheehan, one person can start something - Feingold is my candidate right now to lead on this. But that's looking forward to 2008.

In 2006, we really do need to get Democrats because venal, and cowardly, and lazy, as they may be, they are people who could be pressed into holding genuine investigations of the torture, of the corruption, getting rid of Hastert, and starting impeachment proceedings. I think they're partisan enough to follow the voters and do what the voters want - and voters would say either 'Fire these guys, like Hastert, and the President, or we fire you' - and that, as they say on Capitol Hill, they may not see the light, but they'll feel the heat.
---------------------------------

2006-10-13T15:51:00.000+10:00

Foley scandal a boon for Hastert’s opponent

2006-10-11T10:08:00.000+10:00

* The Hill:

"Foley scandal a boon for Hastert’s opponent

The scandal involving former Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) has trickled down to help the longest of long shots, including Speaker Dennis Hastert’s (R-Ill.) opponent.

In the days since Foley resigned, Democrat John Laesch raked in $40,000 from online contributions. He has had to reorder yard signs and install new phone lines in his campaign headquarters in Yorkville, Ill.

"Over the weekend, there were 20 to 30 people in the office that I’d never seen before," Laesch told The Hill. "People were coming in with a $100 check and asking for a yard sign."

The new interest in Laesch’s quixotic campaign underscores the impact the Foley scandal has had. Still, Hastert has never had a close race since winning with 52 percent of the vote in 1986. Since then he has always won with more than 64 percent of the vote in a district that President Bush won in 2000 and 2004 with 55 percent of the vote. "

Help John Laesch

Dennis Hastert is a bumbling half-wit

2006-10-11T09:42:00.000+10:00

* TNR:

"Can there be any doubting the conspiracy at the heart of the Mark Foley scandal? For years, much of official Washington has harbored a shameful secret about a certain congressman. Republicans looked the other way because they worried about their fragile majority, while the media played the role of willing enabler. Most knew the truth would come out eventually, but few had the guts to face it.

I refer here, of course, to the fact that Dennis Hastert is a bumbling half-wit--something that became apparent to the world last week but had been common knowledge in Washington for almost a decade. It was roughly eight years ago, after all, that Tom DeLay installed Hastert as his front-man, knowing full well that Hastert was no more capable of being speaker than the average sheepdog, to which he bears a remarkable resemblance. (Just after Hastert accepted the speaker's gig, a reporter asked him how he felt. Hastert's one-word response: "Scared.") But, rather than call DeLay on this lapse in judgment, House Republicans joined forces with the press to perpetrate an elaborate cover-up.

Reading back over the last several years of Hastert coverage, one is astonished by the lengths to which reporters go to avoid outing him as a guileless nincompoop. One common approach--frequently deployed in stories about dumb-but-powerful politicians--is to interpret Hastert's apparent lack of intelligence as evidence of his enigmatic character, as though Hastert were a walking riddle with jowls and a Midwestern accent."

Hastert's dodgy real estate, Turkish bribes. Worse than FoleyGate

2006-10-07T17:10:00.000+10:00

* Norm Ornstein at TNR:

"Denny Hastert's dodgy real estate deals. Worse than FoleyGate

Until last week, the broad image of House Speaker Dennis Hastert was of an affable, even grandfatherly figure. But Hastert's response--or lack thereof--to the Mark Foley scandal has suddenly put him in the hot seat, requiring even President Bush to defend him. The Speaker's reputation has taken a serious hit. Still, the image remains of an amiable guy, whose sins are more of sloth than malevolence.

Speaker Hastert, however, is no passive figure. When it comes to running the House, Hastert has, in fact, been an aggressive partisan. Recall, for instance, that he personally fired the chairman and two Republican members from the House Ethics Committee after they had the effrontery to rebuke Tom DeLay for misconduct. And when it comes to real estate, he has been a downright wheeler-dealer. Virtually overnight, the speaker's net worth went from approximately $300,000 to at least $6.2 million--thanks, in no small part, to an earmark he authored.

Hastert's real estate transactions have been reported extensively in the Chicago press and picked apart in a June report issued by the Sunlight Foundation. But they have been largely ignored in the national media. A careful examination of the facts in the case, however, leads to the conclusion that there are compelling reasons beyond the Foley case to call for the speaker's resignation from the post.
[]
Hastert has responded forcefully to the allegations of venality. "I owned land, and I sold it, like millions of people do every day." The speaker's office has painted a portrait of a guy who just happened to be driving past a house he liked; he bought it and subsequently, in a straightforward transaction, sold some of the land that came with it for a profit.

The speaker hasn't exactly helped his case with his accounts of the transaction. His office has, for instance, described the Prairie Parkway as located over five miles from his property. But U.S. Geological Survey aerial photographs clearly show it to be about four miles closer than that.

We cannot say at this juncture whether the actions taken by the speaker are illegal. We can say that they do not meet the standards we expect--or should expect--from a member of Congress. And they certainly do not meet the standards we expect from the speaker of the House."

* Lukery:

"Denny Hastert's Turkish bribes. Worse than FoleyGate
[]
In David Rose's blockbuster article in Vanity Fair, there are three separate bribery claims:

a) Hastert received tens of thousands of dollars in illegal campaign contributions

b) Hastert received tens of thousands of dollars in surreptitious payments in exchange for political favors and information. These bribes were delivered in cash in suitcases. We don't know specifically what these payments were for.

c) Hastert is believed to have accepted another $500,000. The details are a little murky, but it has been reported that this payment was in return for pulling a Congressional resolution on the Armenian genocide.

Got that? At least three different bribes that we know about."

why Hastert should be in jail

2006-10-06T13:23:00.000+10:00

I've put together a new post here on our current knowledge of why Hastert should be in jail (not including covering up the sex crimes of his friends)

Kill The Messenger: The Sibel Edmonds Story

2006-10-06T13:01:00.000+10:00

For all the news about the new film about Sibel Edmonds, see Sibel's site here including the trailer, or the blog for the movie here.

Resign, Denny.

2006-10-02T08:53:00.000+10:00

this is from John Laesch at DailyKos

Response to Hastert/Foley Pagegate Scandal
by John Laesch
Sat Sep 30, 2006 at 06:27:57 PM PDT
This is John Laesch, the Democratic candidate running against Dennis Hastert.
Our campaign office reports that the phone has not stopped ringing all day and the Inbox on our e-mail account is exploding.
We know that Dennis Hastert has been the "cover-up" guy for everything that is wrong in Washington. Hastert has been cleaning up messes all the way from this Wednesday's "get out of jail free" detainee bill that he gave to George Bush to gutting house ethics rules after Tom DeLay was indicted.
I am currently working with Danny Stover who is running against Shimkus in Illinois' 19th District to hold a near-term press conference. If you want to help Danny Stover get a $400 plane ticket to Chicago, you can donate here
It is time for both of these gentlemen to do the right thing for America and resign.
This morning we held a press conference in St. Charles, IL and I basically said that it is time for Dennis Hastert to resign. If he does not do the honorable thing then voters should fire him on Nov. 7th.
I started my speech with some of Hastert's own words from a 1998 press conference.

"Even though our children may be at home with the doors locked,"
"that doesn't mean that they are safe. We must continue to be proactive in warding off pedophiles and other creeps who want to take advantage of our children...It's not infringing on liberties, it's about protecting our kids."
Apparently proactive in Washington means waiting 11 months...
Exactly one month ago today Dennis Hastert made the front page of the Kane County Chronicle, a local paper, that covered Dennis Hastert's town hall forum on Internet safety.
Protecting children is OK for Dennis Hastert when it is earning him votes, but he doesn't give a damn when it is a page working on Capital Hill.
The fact that Hastert tried to cover this up is reason enough for him to resign.
The fact that Hastert is playing dumb means that he does not plan to go quietly into the night.
I am going to be reading all of the posts from Kossacks tonight and I cannot sit around too much longer. Please continue to offer advice and vote in our poll.
Update: Hastert trying to change the subject CNN is now reporting that House Leaders want criminal charges on Foley. They want to shift all the blame to Foley and away from themselves. According to CNN:
"The improper communications between Congressman Mark Foley and former House congressional pages is unacceptable and abhorrent. It is an obscene breach of trust," read the statement issued by Majority Leader John Boehner of Ohio, House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert of Illinois, and Majority Whip Roy Blunt of Missouri.

Earlier Saturday, the chairman of the House Page Board said Foley "was not honest about his conduct," referring to e-mail exchanges that a former page has called "sick, sick, sick."
Ummmm that is not going to happen. It sure didn't take long to realize that they are all going down for this.

Sincerely,
John Laesch
Democratic candidate for U.S. Congress

2006-07-15T13:56:00.000+10:00

via desi

disclose, denny

2006-07-08T19:39:00.000+10:00

(scroll down for new posts - and note that this post has been "forward-dated" so that it stays on top - it was actually posted in feb 05 )

In the September 2005 Issue of Vanity Fair, David Rose wrote an article called An Inconvenient Patriot which documented some of the details about Sibel Edmonds' story.

In the article, Rose describes an FBI counter-intelligence operation investigating attempts to bribe elected members of Congress in DC and Chicago dating back to 1997. An FBI Counterintelligence official who worked on this particular case noted that according to "some of the wiretaps, the F.B.I.’s targets had arranged for tens of thousands of dollars to be paid to Hastert’s campaign funds in small checks."

These efforts appear designed to slip under the Federal Election Commission regulations which stipulate that only donations greater than $200 are required to be itemized in public filings.

Rose's article suggests that these payments/bribes were made by certain Turkish lobbying groups as the price for Hastert's decision to torpedo a proposed congressional resolution which would recognize the Armenian genocide.

Despite many attempts by Vanity Fair, Hastert declined to provide any information refuting the claims, and in the six months since then, his office has simply dismissed the claims as 'ridiculous' - until now. In the most recent edition, Vanity Fair published a letter from Hastert's lawyer Randy Evans which purports to debunk some of the claims in Rose's article - but the letter is transparently disingenuous to anyone remotely familiar with the details. (see here for Evans' letter, and responses from both David Rose and Sibel Edmonds)

It isn't obvious why Hastert decided to respond to these charges in VF now, six months after Rose's article, but it is very clear that the response is unsatisfactory.

Dennis Hastert is two heartbeats, and two impeachment motions, away from the presidency. It's up to him to prove that he is worthy of the position - a good starting point would be the debunking of these very serious allegations that he is in the pocket of foreign interest groups.

Hastert must come clean now and release the detail of all of his campaign contribution data, for all of his PACs and any other fund-raising vehicles.

(I'm in the process of developing some campaign ideas and some action-items and should have more in the next week)

(cross-posted at wotisitgood4)

I'll keep this post on top - so scroll down for new posts

Hastert: Republican Culture of Corruption

2006-07-04T11:17:00.000+10:00

howie klein at FDL:

Hastert, of course, loudly denies any and all wrongdoing– he is a Republican politician and "deny, deny, deny" is what they teach them in their version of ethics school– and he is demanding retractions and apologies and everything else that Cunningham said and did (before he broke down and weeped and begged for mercy and wore a wire to help the Feds rat out his crooked associates).

Hastert, of course, has a long history of shady dealings and making vast sums of money through bribes and kickbacks. VANITY FAIR exposed him last year after he took a $500,000 bribe from Turkish agents to prevent the adoption of bipartisan legislation recognizing the Armenian holocaust. With Tom DeLay forced to resign in disgrace, and getting his affairs in order before his inevitable prison sentence (allegedly), Hastert has become the titular head of the Republican Culture of Corruption. And what everyone in DC and back home in Illinois’ 14th CD is wondering is, can he be swept out of office by the son of a preacher man?

The high school ex-wrestling coach-turned-multimillionaire (feeding, greedily, at the public trough for over 20 years), represents a north-central district due west of Chicago stretching nearly to Iowa. (Actually, Hastert represents multi-national corporations and the lobbyists who whore for them but his power derives from his political base in IL-14.) Electorally, Hastert has run far ahead of the GOP ticket, although his vote percentage slipped significantly in the last two cycles (from 74% to 69%) In 2004 Hastert spent $5 million on his campaign while his unknown opponent spent $18,028. Caught up in a more public corruption scandal than in the past– and facing a far more formidable opponent– Hastert is in for the battle of his political life this November.

It is rare– very rare– for constituents to defeat someone whose national power has brought the district so much pork and until 1994, when Republicans started a whispering campaign falsely accusing Speaker Tom Foley of being gay, no Speaker had been defeated for re-election since the Civil War!

If John Laesch doesn’t succeed in dislodging Hastert it won’t be through lack of the personal qualities that define worthy leadership. And it won’t be through lack of motivation. John’s younger brother, Sgt. Pete Laesch, currently stationed in Iraq, asked John to run against the gargantuan rubber stamp who represents their district in Congress.
John is 32 years old and grew up in West Africa where his missionary parents were stationed. They moved to a farm in Newark, Illinois when John was 12. He enlisted in the Navy when he was 21 and served as an intelligence analyst in Bahrain, monitoring terrorist activity and analyzing foreign political and military structures, winning numerous citations and meritoriously rising 5 ranks within 3 years.
[]
John already won his primary and now Democrats are united behind his race to replace an out-of-touch, entrenched, corrupt Speaker of the House with a fresh, energetic young man with integrity, strength and vision. John needs help to get out his message. I can’t imagine a candidate as forthright and independent as John is going to get sufficient help from Rahm Emanuel’s DCCC. It’s up to us.

Sibel's Whistleblowers’ Dirty Dozen

2006-07-01T14:06:00.000+10:00

from sibel

National Security Whistleblowers Coalition

www.nswbc.org

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE- June 29, 2006

Contact: Sibel Edmonds, National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, sedmonds@nswbc.org

Whistleblowers Hold House & Senate Members Responsible

Whistleblowers’ Dirty Dozen

The following members of Congress, by their action or inaction, have stood against real investigations, hearings, and legislation dealing with government whistleblowers who have exposed waste, fraud, abuse, and or criminal activities within government agencies.

These representatives of the People are not only standing against whistleblowers, but against the public’s right to know, effective oversight, accountability, and ultimately against the democratic processes that underpin our society. (To see the pdf list click here).

We, the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, together with whistleblower members of our partner coalitions, consider it our duty to advise Americans of these representatives’ collusion with government and private interests to the detriment of the People.

Our position is based on our concern for our nation’s security, for accountable government, and the People’s Right to Know what their representatives and government are doing in their name, all of which depend on vigorous congressional oversight.

Our stand is not based on any political ideology or party – our coalition members include Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians and Independents. We do not ask you to vote for or against these individuals; nor do we ask you to choose a particular candidate over another.

All we ask is that before you decide to vote, you consider the true positions of these representatives with regard to their lack of candor or courage on core issues that matter to our country’s well-being.

Over the years, time and again we have informed these representatives about illegal government actions, agency fraud, and lying to Congress by administrators and bureaucrats. Yet these representatives have consistently refused to take any action and have instead betrayed the People they have taken an oath to serve.

We hope that by appealing directly to the American people, we can help bring about needed reforms, since we have proven unsuccessful in our appeals to the following representatives: the Whistleblowers’ Dirty Dozen. (To see the pdf list click here).

1. Senator Hillary Clinton
2. Senator Mike DeWine
3. Rep. David Dreier
4. Rep. Dennis Hastert
5. Senator Orrin Hatch
6. Rep. Peter Hoekstra
7. Senator Jon Kyl
8. Senator Joseph Lieberman
9. Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger
10. Senator Rick Santorum
11. Rep. James Sensenbrenner
12. Rep. Mark Souder

(update: i'll be interviewing sibel over the weekend about why these 12 congress folk are on the list)

About National Security Whistleblowers Coalition
National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC), founded in August 2004, is an independent and nonpartisan alliance of whistleblowers who have come forward to address our nation’s security weaknesses; to inform authorities of security vulnerabilities in our intelligence agencies, at nuclear power plants and weapon facilities, in airports, and at our nation’s borders and ports; to uncover government waste, fraud, abuse, and in some cases criminal conduct. The NSWBC is dedicated to aiding national security whistleblowers through a variety of methods, including advocacy of governmental and legal reform, educating the public concerning whistleblowing activity, provision of comfort and fellowship to national security whistleblowers suffering retaliation and other harms, and working with other public interest organizations to affect goals defined in the NSWBC mission statement. For more on NSWBC visit www.nswbc.org

please distribute.

Hastert's laundry

2006-06-22T20:31:00.000+10:00

There's one part of the dodgy Hastert real-estate deal that I haven't seen answered. Was the property Hastert's primary residence? I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere that it was. If it was his primary residence, he doesn't have to record the asset/transaction/mortgage in his financial disclosure forms.
(update: the house was his primary residence, according to this)

Beyond that, I seem to have caught Hastert telling lies on his financial disclosure records.

Update: this post is a bit of mess. The significance of the information here, if any, is that two days after Duke Cunningham was exposed, Hastert rushed to file an amendment to his financial disclosure records - adding his $2million home/farm.

According to the Washington Post:

"In 2002, Hastert was driving to a parade in Sycamore, Ill., when he saw a post-and-beam house he fell in love with, according to Dallas C. Ingemunson, a longtime friend and ally of Hastert's who made the land deals for the speaker. Hastert struck a deal with the owner on the spot, purchasing the house near Plano, Ill., and 195 acres for $2.1 million."

In Hastert's 2002 filings, there was no mention of the property - no asset, no liability, no transaction, and no mention of his home/farm.

The same is true for the 2003 filing.

WaPo again:

"In February 2004, Ingemunson, treasurer of Hastert's campaign committee and chairman of the Kendall County Republican Party, established Little Rock Trust #225. A week later, through the trust, Hastert and his business partners purchased a 69-acre parcel for $340,000, providing road access to part of Hastert's farm that had been landlocked. Hastert owned a quarter of that parcel."

On May 16, 2005, Hastert filed his personal 2004 financial report. Hastert listed his share of the 69-acre parcel as :

Asset Value
1/4 share, value $250k-$500k

Transaction Value
1/4 share, value $250k-$500k

Mortgage Value
1/4 share, value $250k-$500k

Note: I'm pretty sure here that we've caught Hastert, or someone, in a mistake. Hastert is clearly saying in his filings that his one-quarter share is worth between $250-500k - but WaPo appears to say that these 69 acres are worth $340k in entirety, and Hastert only has a quarter share.

Having said that, the media reports are quite confusing

Here's how SunTimes describes it:

"Ingemunson told the Sun-Times that the three bought the 68.9-acre parcel from a farmer who wanted "to have cash immediately." Klatt, Ingemunson and Hastert formed a trust, which bought the land in 2004 for $15,000 an acre -- a total price of slightly more than $1 million."

SunTimes suggests that the total price for this block was $1.05M. WaPo says the price was $340k. Hastert says that his quarter share was worth between $250-500k - which would appear to sugggest that WaPo is wrong. Where did WaPo get their $340k number from? I'm sure that number didn't come out of the blue. WaPo - where did your $340k come from?

WaPo:

"In May 2005, Hastert transferred the 69 acres of previously hemmed-in land from his farm to the land trust."

~~The exact date of that transfer is not obvious - was it after or before the original filing on May 16?~~ (note that this 69-acres that Hastert transferred to Little Rock Trust is separate to the 69-acres that Little Rock Trust bought from a third-party.)
(update: the transaction occured May 2, 2005 (link))

Lo, just one month after that filing, on June 14 2005 Hastert resubmitted both his 2003 and 2004 filings in "an abundance of caution" - without adding any detail about why he was resubmitting it. The 2005 amendment of the 2004 records adds:

Asset Value
1/4 share, 69 acres- value: $250-$500k
Home/Property - $1m-$5m

Mortgage
Home/Property - $1m-$5m

(Note that this was the first time that Hastert's 'home/property' was disclosed in his personal financial records. why did he include it if primary residence is always exluded? )

Do you think that it was all completely above-board? or was Hastert's retrospective accounting somehow related to the deal that took place in May 05?

(updated 10 minutes after publication to add that Hastert's 'amendment' occured 2 days after Stern's original article about Duke Cunningham's real-estate deal hit the wires)

Similarly, I haven't been able to ascertain how much Little Rock paid Hastert for the transfer of the other 69 acres. Did Hastert pay taxes on it? Was it all a fuzzy 'book exercise'?

WaPo:

"Then, on Dec. 7, (05) Little Rock Trust #225 sold the Hastert parcels to a subsidiary of the Robert Arthur Land Co. for nearly $5 million. The deal netted Hastert a $2 million profit."

Suntimes:

*In December 2005, the 68.9-acre parcel and the 69.5-acre parcel were sold to a developer, which wants to build at least 1,700 residential units plus commercial space there.

It's all a bit confusing. At a minimum, we can see that he amended his financial disclosures with respect to this particularly dodgy investment.

First things first - Hastert appears to have not originally disclosed the Plano asset in his disclosure forms. Can any journalist out there check to see if it was actually his primary residence? Also - presumably WaPo's $340k number came from somewhere. where?

And the ultimate question, was Denny trying to launder his bribes?

update: miguel in the comments points to this post at Sunlight Foundation which notes that the property was indeed Hastert's primary residence.

(cross-posted)

Hastert's Little Rock Trust

2006-06-22T17:38:00.000+10:00

* josh:

"Good work: the Hastert earmark scam makes it into the Washington Post. "

that's what qualifies for 'good work' these days? at least they front-paged the story.

* at least wapo adds some detail:

"In 2002, Hastert was driving to a parade in Sycamore, Ill., when he saw a post-and-beam house he fell in love with, according to Dallas C. Ingemunson, a longtime friend and ally of Hastert's who made the land deals for the speaker. Hastert struck a deal with the owner on the spot, purchasing the house near Plano, Ill., and 195 acres for $2.1 million.

In February 2004, Ingemunson, treasurer of Hastert's campaign committee and chairman of the Kendall County Republican Party, established Little Rock Trust #225. A week later, through the trust, Hastert and his business partners purchased a 69-acre parcel for $340,000, providing road access to part of Hastert's farm that had been landlocked. Hastert owned a quarter of that parcel.

In May 2005, Hastert transferred the 69 acres of previously hemmed-in land from his farm to the land trust. That summer, Hastert personally intervened during House and Senate negotiations over a huge transportation and infrastructure bill to secure two separate earmarks, $152 million to help build the Prairie Parkway through Kendall County and $55 million for an interchange 5 1/2 miles from his property. President Bush signed the bill into law on Aug. 10.

Then, on Dec. 7, Little Rock Trust #225 sold the Hastert parcels to a subsidiary of the Robert Arthur Land Co. for nearly $5 million. The deal netted Hastert a $2 million profit."

Good to see WaPo actually note that Ingemunson is Hastert's treasurer as well. I hadn't seen that reported elsewhere.

Wapo adds:

"Hastert's attorney, J. Randolph Evans, fired off a letter to the Sunlight Foundation last week, demanding "that the false, libelous and defamatory matter be immediately withdrawn and corrected." In his letter, Evans said that asserting that a new road project would have an impact on land values more than 5 1/2 miles away "would be like complaining about a purchase in Alexandria, Virginia, based on renovations at the Capitol.""

Randy Evans also 'fired off a letter' to Vanity Fair when David Rose's article came out - with much more serious allegations. It's not obvious why those allegations, and that rebuttal, didn't make the front page of wapo.

more soon.

more of Hastert's ill-gotten gains

2006-06-16T08:53:00.000+10:00

TPMM:

The Chicago Tribune puts a number on Speaker Dennis Hastert's (R-IL) killing on that real estate deal: $1.5 million.

And here are the basics, first reported by the Sunlight Foundation yesterday.

Hastert acquired the first part of the land in August, 2002, a 69 acre portion of a 196-acre farm purchased under his wife's name. The rest was acquired by a land trust in Feburary, 2004 of which Hastert had a quarter interest - the two partners were Dallas Ingemunson ("a long-time supporter and political mentor to Hastert who is chairman of the Kendall County Republican Party") and Thomas Klatt ("a local trucking company owner who also has been a long-time supporter and campaign contributor to Hastert").

The funding for the Prairie Parkway, which will run 5.5 miles from the plot, went through in the Fall of 2005. Three months after that, in December, Hastert and his partners cashed out, selling the land to a developer for a $3 million total profit. Ingemunson told the Tribune that Hastert's share of that was five-eighths - about $1.5 million. (The Chicago Sun-Times, without attribution, reports the profit as "close to $2 million.")

Now Hastert's camp is focused on squashing the story with the line that 5.5 miles isn't close enough to affect the price of the plot. In fact, they're so up in arms that Hastert's lawyer wrote an angry letter to the Sunlight Foundation and have threatened legal action. But no amount of yelling will change the facts on the table.

Update: ThinkProgress has a graphic timeline of the land deal.

Nice deal, Denny.

Of course, Ingemunson is also treasurer of Hastert For Congress Committee PAC. We had some questions over at Disclose Denny about whether Ingemunson should have signed off on the FEC affadavit - rather than delegate to his deputy.

Hastert: Real (estate) Corruption

2006-06-15T07:30:00.000+10:00

* tpmm:

"Over at the Sunlight Foundation, they've found Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) taking a page from Rep. Ken Calvert's (R-CA) investment playbook.
For years, Hastert has been pushing the construction of a highway called the Prairie Parkway in Illinois. He secured $207 million in earmarks to support the project. But what he didn't tell constituents was that he owned a huge plot of farmland just a few miles from where the road would run. And now that the project's gone through, the land has been tranferred to a real estate development firm with plans to build a 1,600 home community. The land has already improved in value by millions of dollars.

I wonder how much Hastert will ultimately make on the deal?"

I've looked at Hastert's financial records before - this property was listed as being basically worthless.

blogs: bring Hastert down

2006-05-29T21:32:00.000+10:00

it's time to re-publish Democrats.com 's take on the Hastert bribery claims:

-----------------

Unlike his egomaniacal predecessor Newt Gingrich, House Speaker Denny Hastert likes to stay out of the limelight.

And for good reason. When Hastert opens his mouth, he tends to say cold-hearted things like "It looks like a lot of [New Orleans] could be bulldozed."

But is Denny Hastert's heart cold enough to take bribes to coverup Turkey's Armenian genocide?

According to an investigative report in Vanity Fair by David Rose, Hastert may have taken as much as $500,000 in campaign bribes in October 2000 to kill a Congressional resolution designating the killings of Armenians in Turkey between 1915 and 1923 a genocide.

According to Wikipedia, "Most estimations for the losses between 1915 to 1917-18 range from 600,000 —claimed mostly by the Government of Turkey and Turkish national historians— and from 1.2 to 1.5 million by most of the international community and the scholarship."

The Turkish government rejects the term "genocide," blaming instead "inter-ethnic strife, disease and famine during the turmoil of World War I." But dozens of countries call it "genocide," along with the European Parliament, the U.N., and many U.S. states.

But thanks to Denny Hastert, Congress refuses to call it genocide. And according to Vanity Fair, "a senior official at the Turkish Consulate is said to have claimed in one recording that the price for Hastert to withdraw the resolution would have been at least $500,000."

There is no question that Hastert pulled the Armenian genocide resolution off the floor of Congress on October 19, 2000, after it passed the International Relations Committee by a large majority. (Hastert blames Bill Clinton - as if Hastert ever did Clinton a single favor, besides trying to impeach him!)

The only question is whether he took campaign bribes to do it. As David Rose reported,

According to some of the wiretaps, the F.B.I.’s targets had arranged for tens of thousands of dollars to be paid to Hastert’s campaign funds in small checks. Under Federal Election Commission rules, donations of less than $200 are not required to be itemized in public filings.

Hastert himself was never heard in the recordings, Edmonds told investigators, and it is possible that the claims of covert payments were hollow boasts. Nevertheless, an examination of Hastert’s federal filings shows that the level of un-itemized payments his campaigns received over many years was relatively high. Between April 1996 and December 2002, un-itemized personal donations to the Hastert for Congress Committee amounted to $483,000.

In contrast, un-itemized contributions in the same period to the committee run on behalf of the House majority leader, Tom Delay, Republican of Texas, were only $99,000. An analysis of the filings of four other senior Republicans shows that only one, Clay Shaw of Florida, declared a higher total in un-itemized donations than Hastert over the same period: $552,000. The other three declared far less. Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Joe Barton, of Texas, claimed $265,000; Armed Services Committee chairman Duncan Hunter, of California, got $212,000; and Ways and Means Committee chairman Bill Thomas, of California, recorded $110,000.

Where there's smoke there's usually fire. And the smoke surrounding Hastert's role in this scandal is so thick you need a chainsaw to cut it.

This sounds like a perfect investigation for the progressive blogosphere, right?

So why is this important job falling to a little-known blogger from down under in Australia named Lukery, creator of http://disclosedenny.blogspot.com/

I searched "hastert armenian genocide" in Technorati, Google Blogs, The story has received minimal coverage so far:

DemocracyNow's Amy Goodman interviewed David Rose and his source, FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds last August.
On 2/7/06, BradBlog published the response from Hastert's lawyer Randy Evans, and a detailed rebuttal by Sibel Edmonds. (Scott Horton blogged on that)

I can think of lots of bloggers and activists who should be all over this story:

All of the folks investigating Hastert's puppetmaster Tom DeLay, including CampaignMoney.org
All the folks covering FBI histleblower Sibel Edmonds
Josh Marshall of TalkingPointsMemo.com, the premier investigator of GOP Congressional scandals
Laura Rozen of WarandPiece.com, who has done outstanding work on Duke Cunningham, Brent Wilkes & Co.
Digby of Hullabalo, who understands GOP corruption better than anyone
Joseph Cannon of Cannonfire, who can investigate a conspiracy better than anyone
Larisa Alexandrovna of RawStory.com, one of the very first to investigate Jack Abramoff
ReddHead of FireDogLake.com, who investigated Brent Wilkes
Georgia10 of DailyKos.com, who is studying law in Chicago
BuzzFlash.com, which is based in Chicago
many others I can't think of off-hand

Let's get the blogosphere's top investigators on this story and help our heroic Australian cousin bring Hastert down!

Hastert and the Rule of Law

2006-05-26T18:50:00.000+10:00

Everyone is appropriately excited about Hastert defending the sanctity of the ~~rule-of-law~~ oops ~~precedent~~ oops his office.

Most seem to assume that Hastert's concern relates to the Abramoff ~~bribes~~ contributions - but, hey, the feds probably won't be able to find anything other than contemporaneous promises - and it would be irresponsible for them to speculate about any impropriety in that regard.

Perhaps he is really concerned about the ~~fact~~ possibility that he lied in his response to the FEC regarding his undisclosed contributions.

Or perhaps he is concerned about damning evidence regarding the ongoing investigations that Giraldi described - first:

"The (Turkish lobbying) money involved does not appear to come from the Turkish government, and FBI investigators are trying to determine its source and how it is distributed. Some of it may come from criminal activity, possibly drug trafficking, but much more might come from arms dealing."

second:

"Investigators are also looking at Israel's particular expertise in the illegal sale of US military technology to countries like China and India."

(although I havent seen anything to suggest that Denny is involved with Israel/ China / India)

Maybe Denny is only afraid that about the pictures of him and that nubile goat that he likes to keep in his office. Whatever it is, I suspect that he wont be sleeping too well this weekend. Perhaps Mrs Hastert will ask him why he can't sleep, and why he is sticking up for those mean american-hating democrats.

I'm sure he'll tell her that it's all about the Rule of Law.