Duggar, Santorum, and ten years after, Hastert *update*

Probably enough has been said elsewhere about those first two.  But if not, then clearly 'Duggary' is the new 'Santorum'.

 And there might be a fresh dictionary definition available for getting 'Hasterted' now.

J. Dennis Hastert, the longest-serving Republican speaker in the history of the U.S. House, was indicted Thursday by a federal grand jury on charges that he violated banking laws in a bid to pay $3.5 million to an unnamed person to cover up “past misconduct.”

Hastert, who has been a high-paid lobbyist in Washington since his 2007 retirement from Congress, schemed to mask more than $950,000 in withdrawals from various ac­counts in violation of federal banking laws that require the disclosure of large cash transactions, according to a seven-page indictment delivered by a grand jury in Chicago.

It's Capone-style Chicago politics, as Republicans like to say.  Another shopworn cliche' is that it's not the crime so much as the coverup ("illegal cash structuring"", which means Hastert tried to avoid federal disclosure of amounts just under ten thousand dollars).   Turns out the former speaker lied to the FBI about hush money paid to someone he had sex with.  And the rumors are a decade old.  I am just surprised that Hastert didn't get outed in the Mark Foley matter in 2006.

So to be clear, the latest GOP sex scandal this month has nothing to do -- as far as we know -- with a sex crime involving a minor.  The 'crime' is that it was gay sex.  But that's not what drew the federal indictments, of course.

Just imagine a what a wonderful world it would be if people could be with the person they love without fear of reprisal... biblical, financial, social, or otherwise.

Update (Saturday, May 30): We know more, sadly.

Indicted former House Speaker Dennis Hastert was paying a former student from Yorkville, Ill., to conceal his alleged sexual abuse of the young man while Hastert was a teacher at a high school there, federal law enforcement officials said Friday.

A top official, who would not be identified speaking about the federal charges in Chicago, said investigators also spoke with a second person who raised similar allegations that corroborated what the student said.

The second person was not being paid by Hastert, the official said.

It would be valuable to note at this point that child sexual abuse -- which Hastert has not been charged with -- isn't about "being gay" as much as it about power and control.  In the same vein that rape isn't a sexual act so much as dominant behavior.  Hastert, again, is charged with the crimes associated with the coverup, and is even claiming that he's also been a victim.

The FBI began investigating the cash withdrawals in 2013. According to the indictment, agents were interested in whether Hastert was using the cash "for a criminal purpose" but were also investigating the possibility that Hastert "was the victim of a criminal extortion related to, among other matters, his prior positions in government."

I think I'll wait a bit for more details to emerge before I post further about this sordid business.

Update:  Just because I'm witholding judgement doesn't mean I'm not laughing out loud at those who are not.  Some of the best is in the comments, by the way.

Scattershooting some soft targets

Hypocritical Republicans, clay pigeons, false flags... you know, the usual stuff.

-- GOP tries new/old way to suppress the vote.

The number of ways that Republicans invent to reduce the voting power of the Democratic Party is truly impressive. Here's the latest:

The court has never resolved whether voting districts should have the same number of people, or the same number of eligible voters. Counting all people amplifies the voting power of places with large numbers of residents who cannot vote legally, including immigrants who are here legally but are not citizens, illegal immigrants, children and prisoners. Those places tend to be urban and to vote Democratic.

A ruling that districts must be based on equal numbers of voters would move political power away from cities, with their many immigrants and children, and toward older and more homogeneous rural areas.

....The Supreme Court over the past nearly 25 years has turned away at least three similar challenges, and many election law experts expressed surprise that the justices agreed to hear this one. But since Chief Justice John G. Roberts has led the court, it has been active in other voting cases.

Over the past few decades we've seen pack-n-crack, photo ID laws, old fashioned gerrymandering, mid-decade gerrymandering, the gutting of the Voting Rights Act, reductions in early voting, the crippling of campaign finance law, illegal purges of voter rolls, and now this: a change in the way people are counted that would favor Republican-leaning districts.

From a purely academic view, you really have to be impressed by the GOP's relentless creativity in finding ever more ways to trim the votes of groups who lean Democratic. They've done a great job. Sure, it's been a violent and cynical assault on our country's notions of fairness in the voting booth, but that's for eggheads to worry about. After all, it worked. Right? Maybe its made a difference of only a point or two in presidential elections and fewer than a dozen districts in congressional elections, but in a closely balanced electorate that counts for a lot.

Harold Cook had the earliest and best take on this; he's been working with Texas Democratic state legislators for years on it.  If the SCOTUS decides it's time to return to valuations of brown people as 3/5s of a person, then you know they've finally succeeded in taking "their" country back.  All the way to the 1700s.

-- Over one million Texans, out of about 7.5 million low-and moderate-income Americans, stand to lose their healthcare insurance coverage if the SCOTUS rules against Obamacare subsidies next month.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision in a major new lawsuit against Obamacare this June, and the health coverage for millions hangs in the balance.

This challenge to the Affordable Care Act, called King v. Burwell, came from longtime Obamacare opponents who claim that, because of a key phrase in the law, the federal government may provide tax credit subsidies only in states that operate their own health insurance exchanges. Thirty-four states declined to establish these marketplaces, and instead left that responsibility in the hands of the federal government.

If the Supreme Court rules for the plaintiffs in this case, it would eliminate health insurance subsidies for 7.5 million low- and moderate-income people in those states, causing most of them to become uninsured when their premiums become unaffordable without financial assistance.

Here's how the numbers break down in each state with a federally operated health insurance exchange.

It's hard for those average Americans -- hell, it's hard for me -- to understand how this can even be possible.  But it's part of the reason why I got off the Obama bandwagon nearly four years ago once he took a public option off the table.  Insurance companies and their profits take precedence over people and their health in this country.  That's why America is so exceptional.

-- Ross Ramsey explains the arcane way the Texas Lege operates, through odd rules and fits of pique, especially in the last few days before Sine Die.  It's just what you need if you're only a casual observer of the sausage-making process in Austin.

Update:

A small group of Texas House Republicans on Wednesday morning hijacked the often rote Local and Consent Calendar because they wanted to exact vengeance on some of their adversaries they blame for the deaths of their bills. That is the way it played out on the floor, at least.

After killing several Democratic bills, Rep. Jonathan Stickland, R-Bedford, expressed disbelief that his motives were being questioned.

“People think that we're up here, that this whole thing today has been some kind of show!” he said. “That it's political retribution.” It’s not, Stickland assured listeners, just before essentially filibustering a measure aimed at reducing pet euthanasia in San Antonio.

-- Marriage equality in Texas is as unwelcome in the Loon Star State as Obama, Ill Eagles, federal disaster relief for the recent floods, and Operation Jade Helm 15 military exercises.  So we get the state Senate declaring once more its opposition to same-sex marriage -- despite several failed legislative attempts, a ten-year-old state constitutional amendment already forbidding it, the increasing tolerance of teh gayz, and a pending decision striking down all of this obnoxious bigotry from that same US Supreme Court previously mentioned -- in an utterly meaningless demonstration of bravado and machismo for the exclusive purpose of preening to the virulently heterosexual Texas Tea Party.

(Nice run-on sentence, yes?)

"We affirm the preservation of the present definition of marriage as being a legal union of one man and one woman as a husband and wife, and pledge to uphold and defend this principle that is so dearly held by Texans far and wide," the resolution read.

State Sen. John Whitmire, D-Houston, said he wanted to make sure that while some might read the resolution as a unanimous measure, there was staunch opposition to it passing the Senate.

"So is this a response to some legislation that hasn't been successful, or is more out of concern for what the U.S. Supreme Court might rule this summer?" Whitmire asked the resolution's sponsor, state Sen. Kelly Hancock, R-North Richland Hills.

Oh yeah, fuck Sen. Eddie Lucio.  Preferably employing a man with an exceptionally large penis.

Texas Lege update from Glen Maxey

About 2 a.m. this morning, posted to his FB page.

Whoa, I'm bone tired.

LGBT people are finally, FINALLY free from all types of mischief and evilness. The Senate gets to debate the Cecil Bell amendment by Sen. Lucio put on a friggin' Garnet Coleman bill tomorrow. It's all for show. Garnet Coleman is one of the strongest allies of the LGBTQ community. They could amend all the anti-gay stuff they want on it and he'll strip it off in conference or just outright kill the bill before allowing it to pass with that crap on it. This is for record votes to say they did "something" about teh gays to their nutso base.

And lots of high stakes trading to make sure that other stuff didn't get amended onto bills today (labor dues, TWIA, etc.) and making sure an Ethics Bill of some sort passed. We didn't want that to die and give Abbott a reason to call a special session.

Campus carry got watered down... no clue what happens in conference. And the delaying tactics kept us from reaching the abortion insurance ban.

Four good Elections bills passed today. Three on Consent in the House, three in the Senate, all will be done by noon Wednesday.

And Lastly: Pigs have flown and landed. HB 1096, the bad voter registration bill, is NOT on the Calendar for tomorrow and is therefore DEAD. I am one proud lobbyist on that one. With its demise, no major voter suppression bills passed (well, except for Interstate Crosscheck which is only bad if implemented badly, and we have to stay on top of it to make sure it's not), and over forty good ones survived.

Just a few technical concurrences, and we're done. Thank the goddess and well, some bipartisanship for once.

I've been rough on Maxey in the past, but he has fought the good fight throughout this session.  He was also the counsel behind the Texas House Democrats' moving over to 'aye' on the pastor protection bill.  My hat is doffed and I am deeply bowing in his general direction (toward Austin).

Texas flood photos

I-45 near N. Main, on the north side of downtown Houston.  This is a regular occurrence every time we get a hard rain.  (Click the pictures for a larger view.)

Bridges over the Brazos Blanco River near Wimberley, Texas (above and below).

Zilker Park, Austin.

Rescued at Lamar Blvd. and 15th Street, Austin.

More Houston flood pictures here and here.

Update:

This picture reflects the scene less than a mile from my house.  As earlier recounted, we stayed high, dry, electrified, and safe.

Texas relies more on federal disaster funding than any other state, but its relationship with FEMA is often strained.

Why is Adrian Garcia complaining about Hickman's housecleaning at the HCSO?

Thanks to Neil for asking the right question.  The irony is as rich as a River Oaks address.

Among Ron Hickman's initial moves as sheriff was filling each of his first eight command posts with white males, a choice critics said shows a lack of vision in a jurisdiction as diverse as Harris County.

These employees range from a major in charge of criminal investigations to an assistant chief who oversees the jail.

Hickman called it insulting to question whether race or gender were considerations in his early staffing assignments.

"I'm still researching the top-level personnel. Given that I haven't finished assembling it," he said, "I think it would be unfair for me to say anything."

However, Adrian Garcia, the county's first Latino sheriff, called it "unconscionable" that all those on Hickman's command staff to date are white and male. Garcia resigned to run for mayor of Houston.

Let's not pretend any of this is 'more qualified' crap.  There was nothing wrong with the qualifications of the people that Garcia had working in his command.  There's probably not anything wrong with the qualifications of the conservative white dudes Hickman is bringing in, either.  This is about politics; "it's not what you know, it's who you know".

"A lot of African-American deputies have approached me … asking me to say something about this. We are going back to the days of (Sheriff) Tommy Thomas," said J.M. "Smokie" Phillips Jr., president of the Afro-American Sheriff's Deputy League. "They are expressing concern that we are going backwards to the old days of racism, the good old boys' system, discriminatory practices and disparity in treatment."

Robert Goerlitz, president of the Harris County Deputies Organization, which endorsed Hickman's appointment, said, "I think the choices are being made more based on ability than based on what race or gender (the individuals) are. It's detrimental to an organization when you make your decisions based on race or gender."

The president of the Mexican American Sheriffs Organization, Marty Rocha, declined to weigh in until Hickman completes his assignments.

"We're going to have to give him the opportunity to set up his command," Rocha said. "We're going to wait until he finishes. … It's not a done deal, and he's still moving folks back and forth."

Yes, it's probably fair to judge once all the FNGs are in place.

In the roughly two weeks since Commissioners Court appointed him to serve the remainder of Garcia's term, Hickman has lined up two-thirds of his command staff. He kept two members of Garcia's top staff, but most of his command picks came from Precinct 4, where Hickman was constable, or, in the case of one new hire, out of retirement.

The sheriff has roughly 25 discretionary positions, and the top dozen are given to staff members who oversee vast regions of the sheriff's $440 million operations. This upper echelon is referred to among insiders as "command."

Two weeks into Hickman's tenure, the demographic change in these leadership roles demonstrates a remarkable contrast to the makeup of Garcia's command. Garcia said he intentionally included qualified people of color and women in the top ranks.

[...]

The command group in place when Hickman entered the picture included two black men, two white women, a Hispanic male, an Asian-American male and four white males.

The two white males who remain joined Garcia's command in 2013. They are Majs. Clinton F. Greenwood, a commander of internal affairs, and Steven L. Marino, who heads patrol operations. Hickman has brought in six white males, five of whom worked for him in the Precinct 4 constable's office.

Hickman terminated Maj. Penny Crianza, a white woman who directed crime data analysis, ran the information technology division and had worked 23 years for the sheriff's office. Hickman demoted Maj. Debra A. Schmidt, a white woman who had implemented sweeping new protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex inmates and employees. Schmidt has served 29 years for the department.

Hickman transferred one black male, Maj. Edwin A. Davis, to a civilian post with a lower salary, and he fired another black male, Chief Deputy Marlin R. Suell, who led the investigation into abuses at the jail.

Hickman also dismissed Maj. Michael F. Wong, the first Asian-American male in command, who directed the sheriff's Homeland Security operation, which included the port, helicopter operations, marine units at the Houston Ship Channel and intelligence. And he fired Maj. Edison Toquica, a Hispanic male managing criminal investigations who spent 23 years with the sheriff's office.

Yes, you have to think that a white male Republican working in the constable's office is more qualified than some of these minorities and women with decades of service in the sheriff's department.  Because of course.

Adrian Garcia looks like a putz with his "unconscionable" remark.  And if he fails to get elected mayor, a lot of extra recrimination gets laid at his feet, as the new sheriff finishes up the four-year term Garcia was elected to only last November.  (That's right; the position of Harris County Sheriff won't be on the ballot again until 2018 2016, as Charles points out in the comments.  I confused it with County Judge, which is in 2018.)

Update: This correction changes my assessment.  Garcia, upon losing the mayor's race, could turn around and run for his old office again, assuming he had not lost too much credibility with the voters after giving it up and then failing in his bid to manage City Hall.  But I'd rather see CM Ed Gonzalez make a run.

Charles thinks the new guy deserves to tap his own people, but the only place I've ever seen where everybody got broomed out of the top management jobs before the new boss draws his first paycheck is the local auto dealership.  Reputable corporate managers may gradually -- over months or even a year or two -- replace key people with their friends; not in the first two weeks.  There's this little thing called institutional memory...

Campos actually got it right, although without being bold enough to be specific, as usual.

If I needed another reason not to vote for Garcia for mayor -- and I didn't -- then what transpires over the next three one-and-a-half years in the SO ought to be obvious enough to everyone to make up their own minds about the former sheriff.  As for Hickman: too early to pronounce him a failure, but he's headed fast down that road.

Update via Carl Whitmarsh, quoting Houston social justice activist Ray Hill:

"The appointment (by county commissioners of Sheriff Hickman) is until the 2016 election but his incumbency and that we are not getting an honest vote count in November elections in Harris County give him a wide lead... To be successful, a Democrat must have about an 8% lead to overcome the "adjustment" imposed by those who count the votes..."

"When Adrian Garcia resigned from being sheriff to make a kamikaze run for mayor, he abandoned the position to be filled by a classic good ol' boy who has now passed the high-paying jobs to his cronies, almost all white former close friends with the likes of Herman Short and Buster Kern..."

"Now Adrian wants to be rewarded for abandoning us to the mercy of the merciless. Think about that carefully"... and just for those who are wondering, there are very strong rumors that Democrats Constable Alan Rosen and City Councilmember C.o. Bradford are looking at making the race in 2016 as Democrats.