US Republicans seek clemency for serial child abuser

[catsmate]

Dennis Hastert, former Republican congressman, speaker of the House of Representatives and sexual abuser of multiple boys, has been sentenced to 15 months in prison, followed by supervised release and mandated sex offender treatment program.

Hastert (74) has admitted, publicly for the first time, he sexually molested male athletes (aged 14 to 17) when coaching a wrestling team at Illinois' Yorkville High School in the 1970s.
Unfortunately he cannot be prosecuted for that abuse due to the length of time that has passed, somewhat ironic given his past support for life sentences for repeat child abusers. He was convicted for matters relating to an attempt to pay-off one of his accusers and lying to a Federal investigation. At the time Hastert accused the person whom he was paying off of making false allegations of sexual abuse.

The sentencing hearing had numerous letters submitted by other politicians including John Doolittle (Republican), David Dreier (Republican), Thomas Ewing (Republican), Porter Goss (Republican), Tyrone Fahner (Republican) and Doris Karpiel (Republican). Possibly the most nauseating was the contribution by Tom DeLay (Republican) who said of Hastert:

He is a good man that loves the Lord. He doesn't deserve what he is going through.

DeLay did not say whether the boys molested by Hastert "deserved" what they went through.
Doolittle, Dreier, Goss and Thomas are law-and-order Republicans. And gross hypocrites.

NY Times.

 

[Norman Alexander]

Maybe they don't want their sins revealed somehow when Hastert goes in the slammer.

 

[catsmate]

Maybe they don't want their sins revealed somehow when Hastert goes in the slammer.

Depressingly that's quite realistic.

 

[Arcade22]

Maybe they don't want their sins revealed somehow when Hastert goes in the slammer.

I think the relationship between these people is the sole reason for why they care at all. They wouldn't care if it was someone they haven't heard about. If anything they'd probably complain about him not being killed.

They'd pretty much support putting people to death for child molestation, breaking the law three times, committing sodomy or flag burning. But what happens when someone they care about (like family, friends or relatives) gets accused of something like that? Then it's "special" and the rules they support for everyone else suddenly seem a little harsh...

 

[3point14]

I think the relationship between these people is the sole reason for why they care at all. They wouldn't care if it was someone they haven't heard about. If anything they'd probably complain about him not being killed.

They'd pretty much support putting people to death for child molestation, breaking the law three times, committing sodomy or flag burning. But what happens when someone they care about (like family, friends or relatives) gets accused of something like that? Then it's "special" and the rules they support for everyone else suddenly seem a little harsh...

Same thing with abortions, I think.

 

[Ladewig]

Same thing with abortions, I think.

And for some, it is the same thing with homosexuality.

 

[Dr. Keith]

I think the relationship between these people is the sole reason for why they care at all. They wouldn't care if it was someone they haven't heard about. If anything they'd probably complain about him not being killed.

They'd pretty much support putting people to death for child molestation, breaking the law three times, committing sodomy or flag burning. But what happens when someone they care about (like family, friends or relatives) gets accused of something like that? Then it's "special" and the rules they support for everyone else suddenly seem a little harsh...

Well put.

I have a handicap in my thought process that prevents me from ever being successful at things that require such politicking. When I see a law the first thing I think of is how it could be maliciously applied against me and mine. I never see myself as the enforcer, I see myself as the target. Very limited way of thinking, apparently.

 

[fuelair]

Dennis Hastert, former Republican congressman, speaker of the House of Representatives and sexual abuser of multiple boys, has been sentenced to 15 months in prison, followed by supervised release and mandated sex offender treatment program.

Hastert (74) has admitted, publicly for the first time, he sexually molested male athletes (aged 14 to 17) when coaching a wrestling team at Illinois' Yorkville High School in the 1970s.
Unfortunately he cannot be prosecuted for that abuse due to the length of time that has passed, somewhat ironic given his past support for life sentences for repeat child abusers. He was convicted for matters relating to an attempt to pay-off one of his accusers and lying to a Federal investigation. At the time Hastert accused the person whom he was paying off of making false allegations of sexual abuse.

The sentencing hearing had numerous letters submitted by other politicians including John Doolittle (Republican), David Dreier (Republican), Thomas Ewing (Republican), Porter Goss (Republican), Tyrone Fahner (Republican) and Doris Karpiel (Republican). Possibly the most nauseating was the contribution by Tom DeLay (Republican) who said of Hastert:

DeLay did not say whether the boys molested by Hastert "deserved" what they went through.
Doolittle, Dreier, Goss and Thomas are law-and-order Republicans. And gross hypocrites.

NY Times.

What else would /should anyone expect from republickers? It has been 36 years since they began the change to what they are now and I do not expect a reversal of their foulness in my lifetime.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

who said of Hastert:
Quote:
He is a good man that loves the Lord. He doesn't deserve what he is going through.
DeLay did not say whether the boys molested by Hastert "deserved" what they went through.
Doolittle, Dreier, Goss and Thomas are law-and-order Republicans. And gross hypocrites.

Those boys didn't love the lord.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Is there something about men that results in this kind of reaction to child abuse?

He is a good man that loves the Lord. He doesn't deserve what he is going through.

You have thousands of men in the Catholic Church that also took similar positions about their colleagues.

I'm not condemning all men here, there is no reason for that sidetrack in addressing my post. But how do you say an admitted child sex abuser, "doesn't deserve what he is going through"?

 

[fuelair]

Is there something about men that results in this kind of reaction to child abuse?


You have thousands of men in the Catholic Church that also took similar positions about their colleagues.

I'm not condemning all men here, there is no reason for that sidetrack in addressing my post. But how do you say an admitted child sex abuser, "doesn't deserve what he is going through"?

Apparently you say either "He is a good and faithful priest of the Lord!" or "He is a staunch and important Republican leader!" Those often seem to be "Get out of jail free!!" cards.

 

[3point14]

Is there something about men that results in this kind of reaction to child abuse?


You have thousands of men in the Catholic Church that also took similar positions about their colleagues.

I'm not condemning all men here, there is no reason for that sidetrack in addressing my post. But how do you say an admitted child sex abuser, "doesn't deserve what he is going through"?

Perhaps because they know him and therefore he's an actual person to them, unlike the abused, whom they've never met and therefore can be dismissed as 'not one of us' and therefore undeserving of the protection of the law?

Is it an ingroup - outgroup thing?

 

[fuelair]

Perhaps because they know him and therefore he's an actual person to them, unlike the abused, whom they've never met and therefore can be dismissed as 'not one of us' and therefore undeserving of the protection of the law?

Is it an ingroup - outgroup thing?

If that kind of thing is acceptable to that in-group I can but wish there was a hell for them to spend eternity in!!!!!

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Perhaps because they know him and therefore he's an actual person to them, unlike the abused, whom they've never met and therefore can be dismissed as 'not one of us' and therefore undeserving of the protection of the law?

Is it an ingroup - outgroup thing?

Why no women backing these slime-balls up?

Or are there just as many women? I can see women supporting hubby who's accused of rape or something, of an adult. But the idea the guy's your friend ergo the child's pain has no worth, is that a guy thing? I can't picture it.

And I know, many men can't picture it either, but this seems to be a preponderance of men. And with women standing up for accused men it's usually a mother or girlfriend/wife of the perp.

 

[pgwenthold]

Recall the story of Lot from Genesis. Offered up his daughters to the town mob to be raped. Moved to the mountains alone with his daughters and barrels of wine. Both his daughters get pregnant. He claims that THEY raped him (got him drunk beyond capacity and took advantage of him).

And he is cheered as a righteous man.

Or a more recent example

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thoughtfulpastor/2016/04/26/the-problem-with-uppity-women/

Saeed Abedini is an Iranian pastor who has been imprisoned in Iran for several years. After tireless work on the part of his wife, Naghmeh, partnering with big political names (Ted Cruz, for example) and big conservative Christians names and groups (like Franklin Graham), Saeed was recently released.

After his release, Naghmeh then released her own bombshell: Saeed has been systematically abusing her, physically, emotionally, and spiritually, for most of their married life. She has insisted upon living apart, making proper legal arrangements for their children, and will not even consider the possibility of reconciliation without extensive counseling.

What has been the response from the conservative Christian community? They've turned on HER. She must be lying. He's a Christian hero and martyr.

Who was arrested and convicted of domestic violence in 2007.

But she is obviously lying.

 

[AdamSK]

Why no women backing these slime-balls up?

The women aren't the leaders in this community; they're not expected to step up and say anything.

But I can tell you the support is community-wide and involves as many women as men. It's circling the wagons to protect someone you're invested in and personally respect. That's not a masculine thing; it's a tribal thing. I've seen it plenty of times with church leaders accused of this sort of thing and the women are just as supportive even if they're less publicly vocal about it.

 

[fuelair]

Ignorant ***** will be ignorant *****/or/tirds of a feather flock together..........

 

[luchog]

Is there something about men that results in this kind of reaction to child abuse?

Why do you assume it's only men that react that way. I can't begin to count the number of women I've heard excuse and deny similar acts by well-known religious figures.

It's a religious thing, not a male/female thing. If someone is believed to be a sufficiently "godly" and important person, then any sin they commit and any lives they ruin are either dismissed as "lies of the enemy to discredit him/her"; or if it is sufficiently proven or admitted, then it's "a tragic mistake, that we should forgive and move past". I used to hear this kind of crap in church all the time, and it was just as loud and strident from the women as it was from the men. But it's mostly men who are the public figures, so it'll be mostly men that people from outside the community hear it from.

Unless it happens to their own children, of course.

 

[angrysoba]

Is there something about men that results in this kind of reaction to child abuse?


You have thousands of men in the Catholic Church that also took similar positions about their colleagues.

I'm not condemning all men here, there is no reason for that sidetrack in addressing my post. But how do you say an admitted child sex abuser, "doesn't deserve what he is going through"?

I don't think that men in general would react in that way at all, no. The vast majority of men that I know of would be disgusted by Hastert and would see no mitigation in the fact that he believed in fairy tales as well. In fact, the posturing display of being Holier than thou would be an aggravating factor because this behaviour is worse than any that anyone should reasobably expect if any man.

 

[catsmate]

Why no women backing these slime-balls up?

There are. Hastert's wife and Republican politician Doris Karpiel (Illinois state, retired) wrote to the court seeking clemency. She wrote:

Dennis Hastert was the best kind of public official…
Although he achieved much in his life, he now has lost a great deal especially the one thing that matters most to a man like him, his good name. Further punishment will serve no real purpose, and I ask that you take his years of public service and many accomplishments into account when he is sentenced.

Or are there just as many women?

No, most of the letters were from men. Approximately one-third were withdrawn when the sentencing judge said they'd be part of the public record.

I can see women supporting hubby who's accused of rape or something, of an adult. But the idea the guy's your friend ergo the child's pain has no worth, is that a guy thing? I can't picture it.

It happens.

ETA. Four other women wrote in support of Hastert.
The text of the forty one letters of support can be found here. 14MB PDF