Monday, December 11, 2017

Do you believe he didn't know?


Democrat outraged to learn taxpayers paid $220,000 sexual harassment claim against him



Democrat outraged to learn taxpayers paid $220,000 sexual harassment claim against him
Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.) says he is outraged to learn that a settlement was made on his behalf to pay $220,000 to a claim of sexual harassment. (Mark Wilson/Getty Images) 


Rep.  Alcee L. Hastings (D-Fla.) was accused of sexual harassment and the settlement cost the taxpayer $220,000, a report from Roll Call claimed Friday.
What were the accusations?
A former congressional staff member named Winsome Packer claimed that the representative “touched her, made unwanted sexual advances, and threatened her job.”
She was stationed in Vienna and was required to travel with Hastings to other foreign countries. She said in her lawsuit that Hastings repeatedly asked to stay at her apartment or to visit her hotel room. Packer also said he frequently hugged her, and once asked her what kind of underwear she was wearing.
She filed a complaint with the Office of Compliance in 2010, and sued Hastings in 2011. That lawsuit was dismissed in 2012, and an ethics investigation in the matter was dismissed in 2014. However, the settlement came through the Senate Chief Counsel for Employment from the treasury.
What was Hastings response?
In a statement to Roll Call Friday, he called the accusations “ludicrous” and said he didn’t even know about the settlement previously.
“Until this evening, I had not seen the settlement agreement between the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) and Ms. Packer,” he said. “This matter was handled solely by the Senate Chief Counsel for Employment. At no time was I consulted, nor did I know until after the fact that such a settlement was made.”
“I am outraged that any taxpayer dollars were needlessly paid to Ms. Packer,” he said.

Judicial career (1977–1989)[edit]

In 1977, he became a judge of the circuit court of Broward County, Florida. In 1979, he was appointed by President Jimmy Carter as a U.S. district judge for the Southern District of Florida.
In 1981, Hastings was charged with accepting a $150,000 bribe in exchange for a lenient sentence and a return of seized assets for 21 counts of racketeering by Frank and Thomas Romano, and of perjury in his testimony about the case. In 1983, he was acquitted by a jury after his alleged co-conspirator, William Borders, refused to testify in court, resulting in a jail sentence for Borders.[4]
In 1988, the Democratic-controlled U.S. House of Representatives took up the case, and Hastings was impeached for bribery and perjury by a vote of 413–3. He was then convicted in 1989 by the United States Senate, becoming the sixth federal judge in the history of the United States to be removed from office by the Senate. The Senate, in two hours of roll calls, voted on 11 of the 17 articles of impeachment. It convicted Hastings of eight of the 11 articles. The vote on the first article was 69 for and 26 opposed.[1]
The Senate had the option to forbid Hastings from ever seeking federal office again, but did not do so. Alleged co-conspirator attorney William Borders went to jail again for refusing to testify in the impeachment proceedings, but was later given a full pardon by President Bill Clinton on his last day in office.[5]
Hastings filed suit in federal court claiming that his impeachment trial was invalid because he was tried by a Senate committee, not in front of the full Senate, and that he had been acquitted in a criminal trial. Judge Stanley Sporkin ruled in favor of Hastings, remanding the case to the Senate, but stayed his ruling pending the outcome of an appeal to the Supreme Court in a similar case regarding Judge Walter Nixon, who had also been impeached and removed.[6]
Sporkin found some "crucial distinctions"[7] between Nixon's case and Hastings', specifically, that Nixon had been convicted criminally, and that Hastings was not found guilty by two-thirds of the committee who actually "tried" his impeachment in the Senate. He further added that Hastings had a right to trial by the full Senate.
The Supreme Court, however, ruled in Nixon v. United States that the federal courts have no jurisdiction over Senate impeachment matters, so Sporkin's ruling was vacated and Hastings's conviction and removal were upheld.[8]

No comments: