Lawyer says Senate should not probe Craig

[JackORoses]

Source: MSNBC - AP

One of Sen. Larry Craig’s lawyers said Wednesday the Senate has no business looking into the conduct of one of its own following Craig’s guilty plea in connection with an airport men’s room sex sting.

An unbroken line of precedents dating back 220 years makes clear the Senate does not consider misdemeanor private conduct to be a fit subject of inquiry, asserted Washington attorney Stan Brand.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17152243/

---

What a headline!

[Gidney N Cloyd]

1. Because it just encourages him?

[Hugin]

2. Well... How about that!

Who'd a thunk -HIS- lawyer would be against it?

:rofl:

[LiberalFighter]

20. That's just like James Bopp Jr stating that his client Matt Kelty

didn't violate the law. And then later Kelty is indicted on 7 felony counts and 2 misdemeanor charges. This is the same James Bopp Jr that was involved in the 2000 Florida recount.

[Demeter]

3. That Headline Is Disgusting! Talk about the Proverbial 10 Ft. Pole!

[LynneSin]

4. Actually I have to agree with this

I mean, no one bothered to investigate David Vitters and he was doing something illegal (using prostitutes).

I have no problem with Craig serving in the senate and personally think that the repukes should treat him with the same enthusiasm they did with Vitters.

[Buzz Clik]

7. Absolutely. The Party of Family Values needs everyone to see them for what they are.

The GOP will be stained either way.

[rocktivity]

27. They're not investigating Vitter because he would be replaced with a Dem.

It wouldn't matter if he'd confessed to being Jack the Ripper.

:headbang:
rocknation

[PDJane]

5. Nah, it's a waste of time and money.

Spend the time and money on the politicization of the DOJ, the christian fundies in the pentagon, the wrong doings of Bush and Cheney, almost anything...there's lots that absolutely screams for an investigation.

Let Craig fade.

[TwilightGardener]

13. Dems aren't wasting ANY time or energy in any of this--it's all GOP.

They're tying themselves in uncomfortable knots, and getting bad headlines. When your enemy wants to hurt himself, you get out of the way and let him.

[damntexdem]

23. Oh, but it's the GOP that wants the resignation, investigation, and so on.

The Dems CAN turn to other things and let the GOP slime itself on this one.

[flyarm]

6. bullshit ..didn't Pelosi say they were looking more closely at ethics? eom

[havocmom]

8. Anybody else hear that as a veiled threat?

Maybe the GOP pols will stick forks in each other.

[flyarm]

12. sort of..look 41 other guys were arrsted prior to Craig..in same airport same thing

he admitted guilt..which is breaking a law..get his ass outta there!

haven't we all seen enough laws the repukes break with no consequences????????

the law is the law..no one is above it..and no senator should be seated in our capitol who has broken the law!

he plea bargined to a misdomeanor..if he hadn't plead it would have been for a higher crime..peeping..


fly

[rocktivity]

28. FORTY-ONE arrests! No wonder the airport called in reinforcements!

rocknation
:wow:

[TwilightGardener]

9. You know, really, a misdemeanor that is unrelated to Senate business

shouldn't necessarily be grounds for expulsion. However, Craig HID this from the Senate and his constituents, when he should have disclosed his arrest--people have a right to know when their elected official is arrested and charged. That was unethical of Larry. Still, I want Larry to stay. I'm enjoying this immensely. The Craig headline kind of tarnishes the GOP debate tonight, IMO.

[damntexdem]

25. Yeah, totally unrelated, no precedents at all for investigation.

Why, that would be like spending time and money to investigate a president for, let's say, a b.j. in the Oval Office. No way would a self-respecting Republican (sorry for the oxymoron) go for that.

[Hepburn]

10. ROFLMAO!

Classic headline! :rofl:

[Norrin Radd]

19. Yeah, they always tee these up for us!

Too easy.

[StarryNite]

47. Yeah, I thought he wanted

to be probed!

:rofl:

[Atman]

11. Suddenly the Pervert Douche Bag Party cares about PRECENDENTS?

How conveeeeeeeeenient. Tell it Judges Roberts and Alito, you hypocritical clowns.

.

[niyad]

14. packwood must be surprised at this

THE PACKWOOD CASE: THE OVERVIEW; PACKWOOD SAYS HE IS QUITTING AS ETHICS PANEL GIVES EVIDENCE
By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
As his colleagues watched grimly, Senator Bob Packwood announced his resignation today, hours after the Ethics Committee released a 10-volume indictment, much of it in his own hand, of his personal and official conduct. But Senator Bob Dole raised the possibility tonight that Senator Packwood would not leave immediately. Mr. Packwood, an Oregon Republican, did not set an effective date for his resignation.
September 8, 1995 Front Page Biography

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/s/senate/index.html?query=SENATE%20COMMITTEE%20ON%20ETHICS&field=org&match=exact

[HowHasItComeToThis]

15. BET IT LEADS DIRECTLY TO A ROVE VOTE EXTORTION AND CONTROL RING

MY BET IS THAT ROVE AND THE NEO-CHRISTIANS HAVE THE GOODS ON CRAIG AND OTHERS AND DON'T WANT IT EXPOSED

[bemildred]

16. O come on, Clinton was impeached for a blow job.

Actually, for lying about a blow job.

[truthisfreedom]

17. Keep this story going, folks! It's bigger than any of the 'thug races right now!

It's on the lips of almost all Americans, and if his lawyer starts fighting now and keeps it up for a few months, we could have another Mark Foley on our hands!

[Demit]

18. LOL! High fives from headline writers everywhere.

The author of "Rings Discovered Around Uranus" is smiling happily somewhere, at the continuation of a revered tradition.

[E-Z-B]

21. Awesome! Hope it works! I don't want Craig stepping down.

It makes it a more competitive race ;-)

[saracat]

22. Was "probe" your word choice or Craig's? Snicker LOL!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[rocktivity]

24. Candidate for this month's "You Call This NEWS?" Award

If you value your life, don't EVER feed me a straight line like that!!!

:rofl:
rocknation

[rocktivity]

26. "An unbroken line of precedents dating back 220 years

makes clear the Senate does not consider misdemeanor private conduct to be a fit subject of inquiry, asserted Washington attorney Stan Brand."

Precedents are for ESTABLISHING, counselor--there's a first time for everything! No doubt Mr. Brand will be shocked--SHOCKED!!!--if the Rethugs decide to make an exception out of him!

:headbang:
rocknation

[truthisfreedom]

29. What an amazing sequence of do-overs.

FIrst he revises history with his "wide stance" nonsense. Next he pleads guilty and then wants it expunged (it never happened), and he resigns from the Senate and then takes back his resignation. He's running out of things to "do over."

[Lasher]

30. Craig Moves to Block Senate Ethics Panel Complaint

Source: The New York Times

Lawyers for Senator Larry E. Craig of Idaho delivered a letter to the Senate ethics committee today asking the committee to reject a complaint relating to his guilty plea in an airport sex sting operation. The move opens a potentially ugly battle between Mr. Craig and the Republican leadership, as Mr. Craig reconsiders his plans to resign from the Senate.

Mr. Craig stunned Washington late yesterday with an announcement through his spokesman that he may return to the Senate despite announcing Saturday “my intent to resign from the Senate effective September 30.”

His spokesman, Dan Whiting, said Mr. Craig is fighting the ethics and misdemeanor charges “and should he be cleared before then, he may, and I emphasize may, not resign.”

The lawyers, Stanley M. Brand and Andrew D. Herman of The Brand Group, wrote that there is no precedent for a Senate ethics review of “purely personal conduct unrelated to the performance of official Senate duties.”

Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/05/washington/05cnd-craig.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

---

That's right, Larry, stand up for your rights!

[truthisfreedom]

31. Where's the "Help Larry Win the FIght against the Republican Leadership" fund information?

I'll donate $1K immediately!

[soothsayer]

32. I pled guilty when i was innocent, I resigned when I meant to stay, i got

married when I was really gay. seems to fit.

[Lasher]

34. Oh, and have you seen his defense strategy?

This was purely personal conduct unrelated to the performance of official Senate duties. But he was traveling to the Senate to conduct official business and therefore enjoyed special immunity from detention, as provided by the Constitution for members of Congress.
:rofl:

[global1]

44. Talk About A FlipFlopper....

He makes alot of bad decisions. What about your support for the war Larry? What about your stance on pro-life Larry? What about stem cell research Larry? Where those bad decisions as well?

Isn't it nice to know that we have representatives in office that make bad decisions?

[rox63]

33. Go, Larry!

Keep the GOP tied up in knots for the next few month. :D

[LeftCoast]

35. Oh this is going to get ugly

It looks more and more like Craig is so deep in the closet he'll do anything to keep up the denial. Of course, that's not terribly hard to understand when you think that virtually everyone Larry Craig called a friend or family would probably have nothing to do with him if he 'fessed up.

[mike_c]

36. on the face of it, I agree with him in several respects....

I mean, the ethics panel complaint has to do with his personal conduct, not his professional ethics, and I'm not sure I like the idea of judging his personal conduct in that context. If he was cruising a public toilet for sexual partners, well, that's unsavory, but lots of people are apparently put into the position of having few other alternatives because of the social stigma that men like Senator Craig himself have attached to gay sexuality. That makes him a hypocrite, and it also makes him a victim of his own politics, but does it make him unethical? Unethical in a context that justifies professional censure or removal from office?

I'm not ready to join the Taliban simply to seek revenge on a republican senator who needed to find a partner to get off with.

[Lasher]

41. Isn't hypocrisy unethical, at least on this scale?

I believe this fits into the Senate Ethics Manual's prohibition of "...improper conduct which may reflect upon the Senate."

[mike_c]

46. what exactly was the "improper conduct...?"

Seeking gay sex? Recruiting a sex partner in a public place? (And don't straight folks seek sexual partners in public places too? How can Craig's offense be separated from the gayness of it?) Committing a misdemeanor? All of the above? Just getting caught?

Who was harmed?

[Lasher]

48. Illegally seeking sex in a public restroom = improper conduct.

Don't try to make this out to be the same as two people meeting for drinks down at the Blue Oyster, because it's not. And he did not commit a misdemeanor. He committed a felony and pled down to a misdemeanor.

He has set himself up as (hetro) 'amily values'champion, and has supported legislation that is hostile to GLBT interests. That's where the hypocrisy comes in and so the gayness should not be downplayed.

[LanternWaste]

49. And I think that can (and should) be separated from sexual orientation

I believe the most serious charge he pleaded to was, "Interference With Privacy". And I think that can (and should) be separated from sexual orientation by simply changing the location--

Imagine had he been charged with Interference With Privacy while simply standing outside someone's bedroom window, then ask the same question: 'Who was harmed?'

[Kagemusha]

42. Yeah, you have a point

What's "unforgivable" is being caught while gay and the leadership's been going around Iowa saying how they purged teh gay from the Senate the moment they discovered it. Having gayness un-purged will not look good.

[sandnsea]

45. This is going to hurt Democrats in the long run

I think Arlen Specter took a quick look at lefty blogs and realized that most of the left was on Craig's side, so there really isn't any reason for Republicans to do anything. If this gets dragged out very long, the worst thing that will happen is the left will go on record in adding toilet sex to the list of things we need to be tolerant of. Democratic candidates will be in the delightful position of having to debate toilet sex, while figuring out how to appease the gay and civil rights communities. Meet wedge issue 2008.

Yeah, this is just great. :eyes:

[closeupready]

37. This could be viewed as discrimination, and

he should defend himself. :evilgrin: (I'm being facetious, of course)

[Jim__]

38. Go Craig! Go repuke leadership!

Hit 'im! Hit 'im!

[BOSSHOG]

39. Give me a C, give me an R, give me an A-I-G!!!!!!

GOOOOOO LARRY!

[David__77]

40. Yay!

Now this thing can drag out as I'd hope it would!

[Lasher]

43. Maybe a few calls of encouragement would keep Larry fighting

202-224-2752

You can email him from here: http://craig.senate.gov/contact.cfm

[eringer]

51. Show your support on Hannity.com

Hannity has a polling question on his new-fangled whether Craig should run for re-election. Is that Hannity showing his support or what! Hannity loves the spin that Craig was set up. Craig is Hannity's hero. I say yes to the polling question and promise to donate generously to the democrat that runs against Craig.

[pepperbear]

50. I agree! They shouldn't probe him....

...without dinner and a movie first.

[Orsino]

52. I discount all lawyers' statements about their own clients...

...or opposition clients. This is wishful thinking, not breaking news.

[brooklynite]

53. Craig seeks dismissal of ethics case

Source: AP

WASHINGTON - Sen. Larry Craig sought the dismissal of a Senate ethics committee complaint on Wednesday and relayed word that he will resign his seat only if he fails to withdraw a guilty plea stemming from an airport men's room sex sting by Sept. 30.

"He said he is going to try and get the case in Minnesota dismissed," said Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Senate Republican leader, telling reporters he had heard from the Idaho lawmaker earlier in the day.

McConnell spoke several hours after Craig's lawyers appealed to the ethics committee to dismiss the complaint against him, saying it stemmed merely from personal conduct, and did not relate to his official duties.

Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070905/ap_on_go_co/craig_senate_52

---

I was framed, I tell ya!

Oh, and I'm still not gay...

[aquart]

54. Perhaps he can re-enact it for us.

[no_hypocrisy]

55. I think he should.

He pled to a disorderly charge, which is bad behavior in public like drinking in public or urinating in public. He has not done anything that is unethical unless you mean he wasn't forthcoming and didn't volunteer this information right away.

[Bitwit1234]

56. I read in one of the Minnesota papers

that unless you can prove it was illegal or something like that, once you had plead guilty in the state of Minnesota, you could not take the plea back. So I suppose Craig can't withdraw the charge.

[DemBones DemBones]

57. Yep, I thought "Somebody had fun writing that headline."

The jokes make themselves sometimes. :rofl:

[Semper_FiFi]

58. Senator Craig should count his lucky stars

that he wasn't caught in an MSNBC "To Catch A Predator" sting. At least his "tea-room" activity is not on video for ALL the world to see.

The longer he keeps this story alive the worse it is for his party of hypocrites. I am sure that he and Jeff Gannon can now both sit around and bash all the powers-that-be.

[saigon68]

59. Probe Craig ???