What law did Hastert violate?
When I first heard about the charges against Dennis Hastert, I was puzzled. There’s a law against withdrawing your own money from the bank in cash and not reporting the transaction? How many people have ever heard of such a thing? Not me.
There have been times in my life when for various reasons I’ve wanted a lot of cash on hand. Now granted, it was never anything like $10,000, the minimum sum of money that had to be reported. But I could imagine plenty of innocuous reasons a person might do that, and would most people have a clue it needed to be reported? I don’t think so, unless the bank told them, and from what I’ve read of this case it’s not clear whether banks routinely inform people attempting to make such transactions of the reporting law.
In addition, I’d never heard of someone getting into trouble for being the victim of a blackmailer and trying to pay the blackmailer off. Apparently, Hastert didn’t follow the proper victim-of-a-blackmailer rules:
Hastert was confronted by someone in 2010 and allegedly agreed to pay money to keep something quiet…Hastert allegedly began making $50,000 cash payments to Individual A…Hastert’s first problem is that federal law mandates cash transactions exceeding $10,000 be reported using a Currency Transaction Report. The reason for this is pretty obvious: It is meant to allow criminal activity to be traced. It is also illegal to break up large transactions into smaller ones to avoid the reporting requirement. That’s known as “structuring.”
From June 2010 to April 2012, Hastert withdrew $50,000 sums from several banks at which he had accounts and gave the money to Individual A every few weeks. Those transactions weren’t reported.
When a bank asked about the transactions, he allegedly reduced the withdrawal amounts to under $10,000 to avoid reporting rules. After a bank asked about the large sums he was withdrawing, Hastert started pulling out money in smaller increments ”” in other words, allegedly structuring the payments.
The FBI started investigating Hastert’s transactions. It’s not clear what prompted the investigation, but the implication is that the bureau was given a heads-up by one of Hastert’s banks.
That’s when Hastert lied to the FBI, saying he was withdrawing cash because he didn’t trust the banks when in fact it is alleged he was doing it to coverup the payments.
As one of the commenters at the WaPo article points out, the law was passed to prevent large drug dealers from laundering money. Has it ever before been used to punish the victim of a blackmailing? And is lying to the FBI about a failure to report your own otherwise-legal financial transaction (the bank withdrawals) a crime, as well, or do you have to be lying about a crime itself?
Rumors are that the blackmail may have been about alleged sexual abuse of a male victim (student?) many years ago during Hastert’s high school wrestling coach days. That’s interesting, as well, if true, because it could involve a mere threat of accusation and fear of ensuing investigation and scandal, or it could involve a truthful accusation of molesting. We don’t know, and the payoff of the money doesn’t tell us, either, although it certainly indicates fear.
Ironic that one of the things that brought about Hastert’s downfall as Speaker was his inadequate and belated response to the revelations that Rep. Mark Foley had been sexually inappropriate with a male congressional page.
Last question: would this all be happening now if Hastert had been a Democrat and Obama supporter?
[ADDENDUM: Much more here.]
Good question. I would say probably – it would be reported, but not with the same enthusiasm, or assumption of wrong doing.
That said, multiple $50,000 withdrawals implies a lot of something to hide. Any former speaker being blackmailed I think would pique the interest of a reporter. Or a conservative blogger 😊
Last question: would this all be happening now if Hastert had been a Democrat and Obama supporter?
Posted by neo-neocon at 3:35 pm.
Trick question?
1. Structuring is what got NY AG Spitzer. Happens all the time. And the crooks know the law.
2. Martha Stewart lied to the FBI and she was convicted.
3. What I want to know is what was the clear evidence of this misconduct? IOW, what is the blue dress equivalent that moved the case from a “he said, she said” deal.
4. Denny is a dope. He should have bought $3.5m in diamonds or gold bars in one transaction, claimed he did it as an inflation hedge and use the untracable commodities to payoff the black mailer.
5. Denny needed to earn $7m pre-tax to pay $3.5m post-tax. Do DC lobbyists make that much money? If so, DC is worse off than I ever thought.
6. If it was a homosexual deal, the Left should lionize him if he comes out as a gay.
7. Another reason to hate DC.
8. How do we not know that Holder started this thing to distract from all the way worse Clinton scandals? That’s the problem when DOJ is a corrupt political tool. You wonder about Hastert and Martinez when the Clintons just skate.
There’s something happening here
What it is ain’t exactly clear
There’s a man with a gun over there
Telling me I got to beware
It’s time we stop, children, what’s that sound
Everybody look what’s going down
Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you’re always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away
It’s truly fascinating that this is happening now, long after he was in congress as SPEAKER, for goodness sake! It does point up the one remaining sin or moral lapse worthy of opprobrium in this world, pedophilia. (Not saying this was that, but if is involved a student from his wrestling coach days…. well… it is very Jerry Sandusky-is.) So, again – why now? Why not reveal or blackmail when he had some power? That tells me the person does not want the world to know … perhaps they also have a family, etc that is in the dark about this former … relationship.
NEO: There’s a law against withdrawing your own money from the bank in cash and not reporting the transaction? How many people have ever heard of such a thing? Not me.
I have… i have even sent you articles on businesses in trouble for doing so, even if they didnt actually do anythig wrong.
i have even tried to bring up a huge number of these changes but to no avail… Been trying now for almost 10 years… long time to be a constant failure…
there are TONS of things like this and i said it was a long list and getting longer and that no one was paying attention and it would be wise to learn as these are the positioning of the pawns that later will checkmate you.
but why anticipate and look forward with knowlege, understanding, and all that? better to ignore it, ignore the warning bells, pull up a irrelevant thing that is not important, make the person trying to warn you feel like they are wasting their time despite they really care and want people safe and happy, and just go on entertaining yourself, avoiding the details till they slap you upside your head.
i am not reactionary, i am anticipatory, and i lack patience to wait until the crapper explodes before discussing things… ie. i would rather prevent it from exploding than spend years whiping crap off the walls and trying to figure out where it came from!!!!!!!!!!!
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
basically its a long chain of laws and things that start with the idea of monitoring bank transfers for the drug trade
which is the same process for making forfeture expand as well… find some justification to make it ok to get around a constitutional point, then once normal and ignores, expand it… till at some point it changes so much the people are aware of it and want it stopped, but by then, there is way way way too much accepted precidence for anyone to do anything about it
so basically, you ignore it when i bring it up, in its infancy with the implications, and by the time it comes up and you notice it, its WAY WAY WAY too late to protest. your asleep at the wheel and waking up 10 feet from a wall going 50 mph is the result…
basically when they made laws that prevented people from depositing more than 10k, and later 5k, without notifying and filling out forms. this mostly affected immigrants who wanted to send the money they made back home, and so did not want to have it noticed.
anyway… when you create a law like that, people are going to adapt to it, even honest law abiding people who dont want to be inconvenienced by doing something technically legal!!!
so the natural thing is to then start cutting up your deposits. ie. taking out 9,999 every day for 6 days rather than take out 60,000…
[smarter people with a lot more money buy a safe, and dont deposit it in the first place, or take money out to pay bills and put money they have in a safe having them switch places]
the kicker here is that people got used to doing this for a long time. and what really got people to know about it (except you) was when they were using the forfeiture laws to sieze the money or businesses that were making daily deposits of their cash drawers rather than waiting to the end of the week.
another side part of this is if the police or someone finds you have more money in hand than they think you should have… ie. you have 5000 in your pocket cause your going to go buy a used car, you get stopped they search you (though you said no) and they find the money. it must be drug money… so they take it, you lose it, and its too damn bad for you…
these laws been progressing for about 30 years, with the more aggressive side bars and variations coming in the last 10… ie. accelerating CHANGE…
you cant control the means of production if you dont control the means of the means of production.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
The IRS Can Seize Tons Of Your Cash If You Deposit It The Wrong Way
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-irs-can-seize-your-cash-through-forfeiture-2014-10
The Institute for Justice is challenging the IRS’ use of civil forfeiture, which allows the government to seize assets it suspects have been illegally obtained. It’s often local police departments that seize people’s cash, but the IRS has also used civil forfeiture law to take money directly from bank accounts, as The New York Times reported this weekend.
All you have to do to capture the IRS’ attention is make multiple large deposits that are less than $10,000 in your account.
Banks that get deposits of more than $10,000 have to report those deposits to the federal government. A person who purposely tries to evade these reporting requirements is guilty of a crime known as “structuring” (or “smurfing.”) It’s a crime to purposely duck these reporting requirements even if the money comes from a legal source.
If the IRS even suspects you’re guilty of restructuring, it can take your cash. The problem is that people, especially small business owners, could have other reasons for making large deposits under $10,000.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Carole Hinders, owner of an Iowa restaurant called Mrs. Lady’s Mexican Food, said she made large deposits under $10,000 because her mother told her the bank had to do “extra paperwork” if she made deposits over that amount.
One day in August, two federal agents knocked on Hinders’ door and told her they’d cleared all $33,000 out of her bank account.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
my wife and i try to save… and we also do an indonesian thing called arisan…
with my wife and i both doing it, we could end up comming up with our turn, and then have a large sum to deposit that we earned and put in, but it will appear like we didnt earn it as its small amounts over months or years. so, i warned them all about this stuff a long long time ago… so that they would not have a husband and wife participating in a few of these things and so having a few deposits of their own money being taken away under the assumtion of the state and your not being able to prove your innocence or rather the monies innocence!!!
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Between 2005 and 2012, the IRS seized more than $242 million in “restructuring” cases
so its not exactly new… your about 9 years too late to listen to the warnings you dont want to listen to nor look at for whatever reasons…
after all, a person may have a good reason to be on a road and accidently hit someone, but that wont help the person who gets run over, does it?
same thing here… everyone may have good reasons for ignoring it, but you ignore it at your peril, your famiklies and friends peril, etc
9 years later is a bit long to wake up, eh?
below is how to catch a hog… above is one of the fences, and the gate is almost closed…
Artfldgr:
If I read every word you sent or wrote I would have no time to do anything else. That’s just the way it is.
But do not for a moment doubt that I, and most of the readers here, are well aware that a huge number of things have been criminalized and that (as some prominent person once said—sorry I don’t have time to look it up)—each of us violates many laws a day without knowing it, and that the authorities can use this enormous number of laws to target virtually anyone they want.
That is something generally known, and talked about quite often, on the right.
Janetoo:
Or it could indicate that the person is making a false claim, and wanted to scare Hastert into paying hush money, but that the person knew that he/she would not be able to prevail in a court of law because of the falseness of the claim.
We don’t know, and perhaps will never know. Coaches and teachers sometimes are guilty of sexual abuse. But they also are vulnerable to false charges.
There are a few lessons we can take from this story. In order of importance:
1) Never, EVER talk to ANY government agent with the power to put you in jail. This includes police, prosecutors, the FBI, etc. They will come as your friends, but all they care about is getting you to either lie or say something incriminating. Say nothing. If you think telling the truth protects you, it doesn’t, because their definition of “lie” may be much different than yours, and guess which definition counts?
2) Read #1 again. Learn it, breath it, live it. Memorize the following for any encounters you have with police, FBI, etc.: (politely)”My apologies officer, but I cannot answer any questions without a lawyer present. Thank you”. And then, to paraphrase Chris Rock, shut up.
3) If you are being blackmailed, get A LAWYER. A good lawyer will show you how to pay off the blackmailer without breaking any laws. This is critical.
4) If you are the one doing the blackmailing, GET A LAYWER. Once again they can facillitate a payment without breaking any laws. Both Letterman and Cosby managed to get their blackmailers prosecuted. You will need a lawyer to make sure this doesn’t happen to you.
Clearly, Hastert is guilty of serious crimes. I know that because I read it in the paper, and heard it on TV. No need to have a trial.
If I had enough money, I would probably break the law, simply because I thought it was the bank’s responsibility to make the report. Ignorance is no excuse; but in a land with a law or regulation governing every human activity, it is a reason.
Of course, the reports I saw did not claim that Hastert broke the law we are talking about. He is not accused of withdrawing excess funds in one transaction, and not reporting it–which is what I thought the law was about. He is of structuring apparent legal transactions to circumvent the law. So, there is apparently some undefined limit–not just on how much you can withdraw at one time, which most people know–but on how frequently you can withdraw some imaginary amount that approaches the legal limit.
On the other matter. Of course, the FBI or any other interrogator can catch you in whatever they define as a lie if they shoot questions at you long enough and fast enough; and you are silly enough to respond to any of them. I would think that surely Hastert knew to say nothing; but, apparently not.
If you are in their sights, you are in trouble. There is some law–or interpretation of some law– that they can (try to) nail you with.
Some Democrat Prosecutor in Chicago is feeling really good right now because he/she has a big trophy measured for the wall. I really hope it backfires.
I would say that the posters who raised the subject of pedophilia based on no factual evidence, should be ashamed.
Yes, in this case the government has passed one law, and then passed another law making illegal to avoid breaking the first law.
This is the kind of insanity the War on Drugs(tm) has wrought…
It is against the law to tell a lie in the course of a federal government investigation. It doesn’t have to relate to your own criminal conduct. You aren’t given any warnings; as long as you are speaking to a federal agent you can be locked up. The lie only has to relate in some way to a material federal matter.
As to structuring, IMO it violates due process up, down, and sideways. Even if you agree with the basic original premise, they have expanded it WITH NO GUIDELINES on what you actually ARE “allowed” to do with your own money in your own banking transactions. For instance, over the course of a few years I had put cash I didn’t spend out of our budgeted amounts aside as painless savings. Needed to use it all recently for college expenses and I was actually afraid to trigger some kind of additional scrutiny by depositing just a few thousand dollars that was out of the ordinary for our account history. Did you catch the part of the linked article where Hassert was withdrawing $50,000 and the bank asked him what it was for? What in the seven hells is that about? “It’s for because I want to, bank manager.” Why does the bank have to know? The withdrawal would have been reported to the feds; they could have asked Hassert what it was for to determine if it was related to illegal activity—but the bank felt the need to go a step further. They seem to be under pressure by federal regulators and law enforcement to discourage or disallow this type of money-moving, even though it’s been reported.
I am constantly amazed by the number of otherwise smart people who cannot understand the simple declarative sentence:
“You have the right to remain silent.”
Even when the very next sentence is:
“Anything you say CAN AND WILL BE USED AGAINST YOU in a court of law.”
Actually, it is not the amount of cash you withdraw or deposit, it is the intent to structure.
Kafka!
I blame the voters.
To answer your original question. The law that was violated was the US PATRIOT Act.
One must assume that the feds asked Hastert what he was doing with the money and he lied.
I have a question: Why isn’t the blackmailer being prosecuted? Isn’t blackmail a crime?
OldFlyer said: “Clearly, Hastert is guilty of serious crimes.”
That’s not clear at all but I can see why you would be confused into thinking this by the accounts in the media. The charge of child sex abuse is so toxic, and Hastert was a coach at a high school for many years, and he’s a Republican. The accusation would stick and become “true” thanks to the media. That’s a perfectly reasonable justification for paying off the extortionist. My question is: where did he get the money? If Bill Clinton, perjurer, sex abuser, unaccountably well-compensated giver of speeches can make billions surely Denny Hastert, former Speaker of the House can make a few mill.
It’s my money, unless
1) I give more than $14,000 to one of my kids per year. Above that, the kid must pay gift tax on the money I gave him.Or, I can keep track of my gifts and file a Gift Tax Return when I get my 1040 done, even if I owe no money because I remain under the lifetime gift max threshold.
Yes, there is a maximum $ amount that one can gift in one’s lifetime; unless one gives to Non-profits (and I despise non-profits, the golden entities that pay zero taxes).
2) I want to pay people ( “independent contractors”) with cash and thus make cash withdrawals on a recurring basis. I buy my groceries and other stuff with cash, because I object to having to leave a digital trail. I also like to keep my credit card use down in order to reduce the chance of identity theft.
3) I die. Then Obama et al get half of the value of my estate. Where’s the indignation about the death tax?
4) Obama and Pelosi et al decide to go after our 401(K) assets and force us into a gubmint pension plan (which has been trial-ballooned).
AMartel:
OldFlyer was being facetious when he said that.
Okay I see that.
Why should anyone feel shame about raising the strong possibility of a child sex abuse allegation before it gets tee’d up and stage managed by the hackocracy? Have I broken with protocol? Thou shalt not speculate prematurely about the schemes of thy betters?
G6: you are correct; technically the offense is defined as deliberately moving money in certain ways with the intent to avoid the reporting requirements. However, in practice the intent aspect is skipped right over, and/or ill-defined. There are lots of people who move several thousand dollars in cash around every day or every week as part of their business. If they want to deposit every time they can get to the bank, or every time they accumulate 3K or 5K, and they do this consistently, their bank will probably make a secondary report to authorities, and the feds could and do accuse them of structuring. After all, if your business takes in an average of ten or twelve thousand a month, you must be structuring if you always break up your deposits to 2 or 3 a month so that they never reach 10 thousand all at once.
Here’s a up clue for the clueless. One of the reasons the Republicans can’t be relied on is that PillowC has a blackmail list on them a mile or so long, at least. Basically at this point, the Leftist alliance controls many Republican good old boys at the upper and middle staff level.
They got even more goods on the Democrats, with those trips to Cuba.
“And is lying to the FBI about a failure to report your own otherwise-legal financial transaction (the bank withdrawals) a crime, as well, or do you have to be lying about a crime itself?”
specifically to federal law enforcement; yes.
To state; not in mine.
Thank you Neo. I thought it would be obvious.
Ms Martel, you can speculate if you want to. On the other hand I do think it rather shameful to publicly repeat allegations of such a heinous crime against anyone–powerful or not–without any evidence whatsoever; other than whispers from an un-named “official”. Just my opinion.
I would remind anyone who ,it that any Prosecutor, and especially one with the majesty of the federal government as backing, can probably get an indictment with little or no effort. Ask six police officers in Baltimore if that is true.
Oldflyer: “I would say that the posters who raised the subject of pedophilia based on no factual evidence, should be ashamed.”
Sorry Oldflyer, Where there is smoke, I’m looking for fire.
Is there any concrete evidence of Denny’s actions?
In a similar fashion: Is there any concrete evidence that Hillary and Bill did a quid pro quo? Is there any concrete evidence that Iran will not keep their word on the Nuclear Reactor deal? Same logical though process in all three.
Hastert was a political hack when he was in Congress and he still is a political hack. Except based on his actions, I now place him in the same category as VP Biden- A stupid hack with power.
Makes you wonder how many times he sold out his principles while in Congress to keep this quiet. But then, hey I don’t have any factual evidence to prove or disprove this. 🙁
There’s the so called gang of eight that authorized the Benghazi arms deal or at least had knowledge of it which they kept from the American public or from their fellow Congress critters.
A notable politician in Georgia resigned soon after that debacle, because he knew it might come out in his re election.
Hastert presumably paid off the Democrat blackmailer, but was unable to pay off Holder and the Hussein Imperial Throne. The latter, was perhaps, the bigger issue. The mafia needs their cut, and no under boss is allowed to get away with deals on the side without the cut.
Well good for you Mikell. Just hope that no un-named official starts stories that you committed a heinous crime; and that the 24 hour media, with so much air time to fill, doesn’t pick it up and broadcast it as though you were tried and convicted. (Yes, FNC I am talking about you among the others.)
I remind you that Hastert is accused of violations of financial restrictions (with his own money) involving the interpretation of a law that borders on the bizarre. He is not accused of sexual misconduct; innuendo notwithstanding.
It is an interesting juxtaposition you make in comparing Hastert to the actions of the former President and Secretary of State; and to the Iranian situation.
It’s easy to think the same of unknown biker clubs as they do about politicians. The question is whether their thoughts are their own or whether those thoughts were implanted due to Leftist control techniques.
Artfldgr,
Neo isn’t an activist as much as you want her to be one. She’s a commentator, no more, no less.