The Rise and Fall of Hope and Change

The Rise and Fall of Hope and Change



Alexis de Toqueville

The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.
Alexis de Tocqueville

The United States Capitol Building

The United States Capitol Building

The Constitutional Convention

The Constitutional Convention

The Continental Congress

The Continental Congress

George Washington at Valley Forge

George Washington at Valley Forge


Friday, February 24, 2012

Judicial Watch Hastings Lawsuit to Move Forward

From Judicial Watch:

Judicial Watch Hastings Lawsuit to Move Forward

Judicial Watch's sexual harassment lawsuit against Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL) continues to move forward.

As you may recall, JW represents Winsome Packer, a female federal employee who alleges that she was repeatedly subjected to "unwelcome sexual advances," "unwelcome touching" and retaliation from Rep. Hastings when she worked for the congressman at the U.S. Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (also known as the Helsinki Commission).

On February 14, 2012, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that pursuant to the Congressional Accountability Act the case will proceed against the U.S. Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, which will now serve as the sole defendant in the lawsuit. Hastings and his co-defendant Douglas Turner are no longer personally in the lawsuit but their behavior will remain a central focus of the lawsuit.

Despite the spin from Hastings, this court ruling does not exonerate the Florida Congressman. Far from it. This is simply a procedural decision as to how our lawsuit will go forward. And we're confident that when the court weighs the considerable evidence against Hastings in this case, Winsome Packer will get the justice she deserves.

Remember, the Office of Congressional Ethics recently determined that there is good reason to believe that Congressman Hastings violated Ms. Packer's civil rights. Specifically, on October 11, 2011, the Office of Congressional Ethics referred the matter to the House Ethics Committee and released a report concluding, "here is probable cause to believe that Representative Hastings violated House rules, standards of conduct, and federal law as a result of his interactions with [Ms. Packer]." And the House Ethics Committee then voted to extend its probe.

So now, with the court's ruling, there is an ongoing battle related to the charges against Hastings on two fronts - in Congress and in the courts. Here's a squib from the statement I offered to the press following the District Court ruling:


Rep. Hastings' attacks against Winsome Packer are disgraceful, unlawful and beneath the office he holds.

Rep. Hastings' aggressive denials and persistent attacks against Ms. Packer, which continue to this day, bring to mind his corrupt behavior that resulted in his impeachment and removal from the federal bench.

We look forward to giving Winsome Packer her day in court and to prosecuting this case. Already, Hastings appears to be telling one version of events to the court and a different story to House ethics investigators.

Of course Ms. Packer's story regarding the disturbing allegations against Hastings hasn't changed one iota.

Ms. Packer alleges that Rep. Hastings subjected her to unwelcome sexual advances and touching over a two-year period when she worked for the Helsinki Commission. She further alleges that Rep. Hastings, with the assistance of Helsinki Commission Staff Director Fred Turner, retaliated against her when she rebuffed the congressman's advances.

(You can read the whole story here. Just be warned that some of the descriptions of Hastings' behavior are quite graphic.)

Now our able Judicial Watch attorneys will take discovery, which could include taking testimony from Rep. Hastings directly.

Until next week,

No comments:

Post a Comment