A reality based independent journal of observation & analysis, serving the Flathead Valley & Montana since 2006. © James Conner.
There are no heroes in the Denny Hastert affair, but there are warnings that our government is keeping a mighty close watch on our money.
First, Denny. Apparently, Hastert, a wrestling coach before he became a politician, was being blackmailed by a former student, evidently a member of the wrestling squad he coached, a male student, an under age male student, with whom he may have had an illicit erotic encounter.
Hastert’s predicament was exposed not because Hastert complained to the authorities that he was being blackmailed, but because Uncle Sam was monitoring Hastert’s cash withdrawals and saw a pattern consistent with evading reporting requirements for large (≥ $10,000) cash withdrawals. When the FBI asked Hastert what he was doing with all that cash, he said he no longer trusted banks. The FBI said, “yeah, right.” Hollywood’s script writers will fight to land the job of scripting that scene.
At that point the jig was up. Hastert should have accused the blackmailer of extortion — the statute of limitations on statutory rape surely has expired — and endured the embarrassment. Instead, he got indicted for lying to the FBI.
Whether the alleged blackmailer will be charged with extortion is not clear. But he certainly should be charged with that crime. Forty years ago he might have been a victim. Now, he’s just a crook.
Uncle Sam and our banking activity. It appears that almost all banking transactions are being analyzed by an algorithm that hunts for transaction patterns that are possible attempts to avoid reporting large cash transactions. The government’s premise is that since money can be moved easily by electronic means, big bundles of greenbacks are prima facie proof of criminal activity. That premise may not be wholly without merit. But I’m not comfortable with the idea that the feds may be monitoring our personal banking activities so closely.