THE DENNIS HASTERT PUZZLE

Former Congressman and Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert--an admitted pedophile--was recently sentenced to 15 months in prison. Some people protested it was way too light of a sentence.  I say it was too harsh of a sentence.

Some of you must be thinking: Conrad, are you serious? Too harsh a sentence? The man molested young boys. How can  you say 15 months is too harsh a sentence?

This is where the Dennis Hastert conundrum comes into play. Many people mistakenly believe Hastert received the prison sentence for the molestation charges. He did not. He was found guilty of violating Federal banking regulations. Banking laws state that any bank transaction, either deposits or withdrawals of ten thousand dollars or more must be reported to the Feds. Over the years, Hastert had been  sending money to one of his victims as hush money. To avoid disclosing these payoffs, Hastert made withdrawals of seven to nine thousand dollars so as not to hit the ten grand threshold. Eventually red flags went up, the Feds investigated, and Hastert was charged and convicted of violating the regulations.

I would be the first to agree that had Hastert been tried and found guilty of molestation, he should have spent the rest of his life behind bars. But because of the statute of limitations, he could no longer be charged with those crimes. Hence, the Feds got him on repeated banking violations. This is what is highly objectionable on a number of levels.

First, let us focus on the actual charges against the former Congressman, while temporarily putting aside his actions as a pedophile. As I noted, Federal regulations state that any bank deposit or withdrawal in  excess of ten grand must be reported to the government. Yet these are legitimate accounts in legitimate banks regarding honestly earned money. What right does the government have to spy on our private legal transactions? The rationale for these regulations is to stop money laundering, primarily from the drug trade. But I contend that I, as a law abiding citizen, have every right to handle my honestly earned money in any way I see fit without Big Brother watching my every move and counting my every last dollar. If I wish to give my only son a sum of ten thousand dollars, what the hell business it it of the Government? Why should every honest citizen be treated like a criminal?

There is one final aspect to the Hastert case that has been made painfully clear. Violations against the government take priority over violations against the safety and security of private citizens. We have two glaring examples.

The first and most recent glaring example is the Dennis Hastert affair. He is accused of two crimes: sexual abuse of minors, and violating Federal regulations. Which one of these crimes was he ultimately charged with and convicted of? The crime against the Federal Government. The sex crimes could not go forward because of the statute of limitations.

Another example goes back almost 90 years. It involved Al Capone. In the 1920's Capone was the biggest, most notorious and powerful organized crime boss in the country. He was responsible for countless murders and assaults, as well as extortion, prostitution, drug dealing, bribing elected officials and bootlegging.Ultimately he ended up in prison, but nor for any of the above charges. Despite the blood on his hands, Capone went to prison for tax evasion--a crime against the government. Apparently his murderous crime spree was not as big and important a crime as cheating the government out of its money.

Fast forward to 2016 and watch Dennis Hastert go to prison for a crime against the government, not for molesting young boys. It seems that the statute of limitation applies only to  citizens victimized by crime, but not the Feds, who always receive their pound of flesh, no matter how long it takes.

A free people cannot endure as long as  government rules and regulations take precedent over the safety and security of every citizen.