HOUSE SPEAKER HASTERT BORDERS ON SLANDEROUS

To the extent that the American public has any image of him at all,
House Speaker Denny Hastert seems to be an avuncular presence in an
otherwise thuggish town, the good cop to Tom DeLay's bad one, the
gavel rather than the hammer. But seeming more nuanced than DeLay is
about as low a bar as a person could ever clear, and over the past
month the speaker of the House hasn't even done that. In fact, Hastert
has engaged in the kind of slander that should prompt his colleagues
to censure him.

The particular object of Hastert's ire is George Soros, the hedge-fund
billionaire and champion of political pluralism and democracy in
Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. Soros is also a fierce
critic of the president, and the largest individual donor to the
Democratic ''527'' groups this year. For which reason, Hastert has
decided to go after Soros with allegations the speaker will not and
cannot support, but for which he won't apologize either.

In an interview with Chris Wallace on ``Fox News Sunday'' on the day
before the Republican National Convention, Hastert said: ``You know, I
don't know where George Soros gets his money. I don't know where--if
it comes from overseas or it comes from drug groups or where it comes
from.''

A plainly startled Wallace asked, ``You think he may be getting money
from the drug cartel?''

``I'm saying we don't know,'' Hastert answered. ``The fact is, we
don't know where this money comes from.''

Lest you think that Hastert simply got up on the wrong side of the bed
that Sunday, he'd made the same claim--again, couched in the
conditional--on Aug. 23 on radio station WNYC. ``You know, Soros'
money, some of that is coming from overseas. It could be drug money.''

Republicans who complain, rightly, about the shaky scholarship of
Kitty Kelley should have to explain why the speaker's innuendo is any
more acceptable. Kelley at least went through the pretense of citing
sources, or a source, or an unnamed source. Hastert didn't even do
that.

Now, it's true that Soros has given money to drug-related causes and
campaigns. He's donated to a number of successful state initiative
campaigns to legalize marijuana for medical purposes. He's financed
extensive needle-exchange programs in Eastern Europe to block the
spread of AIDS. But until Hastert started spouting his charges, no one
had ever suggested that Soros - whose hedge-fund career is extensively
documented - was ever in cahoots with the Colombian cartels.

Well, almost no one. The so-called Executive Intelligence Review, the
journal of Lyndon LaRouche and his delusional band, has indeed made
that charge. This may testify to the breadth of Hastert's reading, but
it doesn't say much for his judgment.

The irony here is that Soros is a figure whom Republicans should
extol--arguably the world's most effective capitalist anti-communist.
He made his money the old-fashioned way, on Wall Street. He is a
prominent apostle of philosopher Karl Popper, one of the 20th
century's most luminous opponents of totalitarianism. Soros sank major
money into opposition groups in the former Soviet bloc and provided
crucial funding to the forces that toppled Slobodan Milosevic in Yugoslavia.

But Soros has also been a critic of market fundamentalism and, more
recently, of George W. Bush's economic and foreign policies. Which to
Hastert means that it's OK to transform a drug-policy reformer into a
drug kingpin, provided he begins his accusation with ``I don't know
if.''

Soros wrote Hastert demanding a retraction, and the speaker responded
with a letter all but denying that he'd appeared on ``Fox News
Sunday.'' ``I never implied that you were a criminal and I never
would,'' he wrote, ``that's not my style.'' Lest there be lingering
doubt that black is white, Hastert's press secretary declared, ``Of
course the speaker doesn't think (Soros) gets money from drug cartels.''

Hastert didn't say he was misconstrued, mind you; he said he didn't
say what he said. This was exactly the same tack taken by Vice
President Cheney in responding to the furor over his remark that the
United States would be more likely to be attacked if John Kerry were
elected president. Cheney didn't say ``What I meant was'' but ``What I
said was.''

By denying they'd said what they'd said, neither Hastert nor Cheney
has felt obliged to apologize to the objects of his slander. Soros is
now filing a complaint against Hastert with the House ethics
committee, though he must know the committee is not about to recommend
the censure of the speaker.

Hastert, after all, was just following party policy. In this summer of
Swift boats and Soros, the Republican leaders have chosen to cling to
power through the kind of slander we have not heard since the heyday
of Joseph McCarthy, and like Tailgunner Joe, they have no shame or
decency left.

Meyerson is editor-at-large of American Prospect and political editor
of the L.A. Weekly