Hastert took Heroin bribes - Sibel Edmonds, Daniel Ellsberg (1 Viewer)

[danarhea]

First of all, to be fair, this accusation is now coming from the Democratic Underground. The accusation is based on this article from the August issue of Vanity Fair, which has been reproduced here, and data from the Vanity Fair article has been expanded on since then.

The accusations accuse Dennis Hastert of taking the following bribes:

1) 'suitcases of cash' - delivered to his home - from Turkish heroin dealers
2) $500,000 for blocking a bill recognizing Turkey's genocide of Armenians
3) illegal campaign contributions from foreign interests.

Once again, bear in mind who the source is, and consider the evidence presented as to whether it is credible or not. Having said that, the GOP has been saying for a couple of weeks that the Democrats may have an October surprise, and it wasnt the Foley scandal. At this time, some of the more radical Democrats are engaging in a mass letter writing campaign to get this in the media, and also to get the FBI to release surveilance and wiretap data which they say proves their accusations.

Is this story true? At this time, I dont know. Only time will tell.

Posting from the Democratic Underground is here.

 

[CurrentAffairs]

Is this story true? At this time, I dont know.

Then why regurgitate it?

 

[jujuman13]

I somehow doubt we are at all interested in your delusional reports.
You of all people should realize that the gutter press will and do print all kinds of supposedly scandalous stories.
The reason they do this is in reality pathetically simple to understand.

There are very few publications that will sell in any volume based on the actual reports contained within them.

I would surmise that well over 90% of Magazines / Newspapers have the need to carry advertising so as to offset the print costs.

In order for the purchaser to be given the chance of viewing these adverts, the Mag. / Paper has to sell.

Smut sells faster than almost any other type of article.

So, Danarhea wake up, if you have a genuine story by all means give us the link, otherwise go back to having someone change your diaper.

 

[shuamort]

The Vanity Fair Article is from August 2005 actually. I'm curious why this is taking so long to suss out or was just forgone....

 

[CurrentAffairs]

So, Danarhea wake up, if you have a genuine story by all means give us the link, otherwise go back to having someone change your diaper.

I agree with you that danarheas article is lame, but your personal attack is uncalled for.

 

[Tashah]

So, Danarhea wake up, if you have a genuine story by all means give us the link, otherwise go back to having someone change your diaper.

Moderator's Warning:

Unnecessary juju. A benign warning this time.

 

[tecoyah]

It really is past the time to stop attacking the oppostion....from both sides. The rest of us just step even further away from you both.

 

[Vader]

I somehow doubt we are at all interested in your delusional reports.
You of all people should realize that the gutter press will and do print all kinds of supposedly scandalous stories.
The reason they do this is in reality pathetically simple to understand.

There are very few publications that will sell in any volume based on the actual reports contained within them.

I would surmise that well over 90% of Magazines / Newspapers have the need to carry advertising so as to offset the print costs.

In order for the purchaser to be given the chance of viewing these adverts, the Mag. / Paper has to sell.

Smut sells faster than almost any other type of article.

So, Danarhea wake up, if you have a genuine story by all means give us the link, otherwise go back to having someone change your diaper.

Exactly how far right are you? Are you a RINO (Republican in Name Only)? What's your deal?

 

[danarhea]

The Vanity Fair Article is from August 2005 actually. I'm curious why this is taking so long to suss out or was just forgone....

Well, Republicans have been saying for the last couple of weeks that the Democrats had an October surprise coming, and that it was not the Foley scandal. If the story turns out to be true, this could just be that October suprise, and I would know why they had been sitting on it for so long. Also, since the Vanity Fair article came out, the Democratic Underground has come up with what they say is more evidence to support the allegations. Of course, this could be along the same vein as the GOP attacks on Clinton, accusing him of murdering Vince Foster, but on the other hand, the Dems are working hard on a letter writing campaign to the media to get this on the air, and are also making a demand that the FBI release surveilance and wiretapping info they are supposed to have on Hastert. This may go away, or it could be a firestorm. Again, right now, I am not sure, but the radical plank of the Dems think they have something, and are so sure of it, they are pulling out all stops to try and make this an issue. We will know for sure in the next few days.

 

[RightinNYC]

Moderator's Warning:

The original story is over a year old, the new "claims" are not from a news source but rather a discussion forum, and this falls short of nearly every journalistic standard imaginable. Moved to a more appropriate forum (though not Conspiracy Theories as I'm temped to.)

 

[Andy]

I'd take this with a grain of salt.