Hastert is going to sue ABC.

[Jara sang]

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=politicsNews&storyid=2006-05-25T175312Z_01_N24342688_RTRUKOC_0_US-CONGRESS-ETHICS-HASTERT.xml&src=rss&rpc=22

Surely, he isn't going to clog the system with yet another frivolous lawsuit against a major corporation. I guess he's going to need a trial lawyer... oh, wait.

[sallyseven]

1. No he isn't. He doesn't dare.

[Divernan]

3. Agreed. Law suit would open him up to very broad discovery.

and huge legal costs. I would so love to be an attorney for ABC in such a suit. I would paper Hastert's ass with discovery motions to see every bit of financial record keeping , and I'm talking every single dollar,every bank transaction, every expense sheet, etc., in both his House office and his campaign office for every year that man has been in DC. I would depose every person who ever worked for him in either office, as well as his donors. And those babies WOULD BE UNDER OATH, and subject to perjury charges. It would drag on for years & cost Hastert a fortune. The courts are very lenient in what parties are allowed to discover - much broader standard than for admissibility of evidence. That's why discovery is described as a fishing expedition. Big corporations drown small plaintiffs with discovery requests all the time. How sweet to be able to do it to a corrupt politician. And to have reached the heights Hasters has and to hold the power he has in the GOP, there are going to be many skeletons in his closet. And then there are the costs of such a suit. ABC can afford them and they're even business writeoffs.

[MADem]

5. Total bluster. I rather doubt ABC is scared.

They're probably in "bring it on" mode. They've got lawyers up the yingyang on staff; and you know the old saying about publicity--any publicity is good publicity, just spell my name right!!!

You have to wonder if ABC isn't delighted at this response, because it helps the outfit in positioning itself. They've done some major retooling over the years, to include the video on demand thing, and this will only increase their visibility and market share.

[bdamomma]

2. I wish it was Sensenbrenner

wishful thinking.

[wicket]

6. Now THAT would be awesome

:thumbsup:

[NRaleighLiberal]

4. Guess that he needs more money for his enormous food bill!

[npincus]

7. We need Tort Reform!

[gatorboy]

8. Gee, I wonder who will have to pay for all of those trial lawyers

Hastert will hire....Me?

[Divernan]

9. Sounds like he would be filing a civil suit for himself - so he'd pay,

not the taxpayers. He probably pulled the typical egomaniac thing and went in some lawyer's office screaming that he wanted to sue, and the lawyer gave him the cold hard facts of how weak, lengthy and expensive the suit would be; quoted a retainer of say, $50,000 and took the wind out of the big blowhard's sails. Then for a much smaller retainer, at an hourly rate of maybe $500, the lawyer said let's just write a threatening letter.

I say it would be a very weak suit because truth is a defense in a libel/slander action and all ABC said was that Hastert was "under scrutiny" and later that he was not a formal target or subject of the investigation but was "in the mix". So if even just one FBI agent talked to Hastert or one of Hastert's staff members about the case, or in discovery got a document from ANY source which referred to Hastert, ABC will have established the truth.