[Vision2020] Senator Larry Craig Challenges Guilty Plea

lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
Thu Sep 27 12:28:06 PDT 2007

You make many good points. Crapo issued a news release today backing Craig's decision to not resign at this time.
I think the GOP leadership were a little to quick to dump on him.
-----Original message-----
From: "Ted Moffett" starbliss at gmail.com
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 13:41:17 -0700
To: vision2020 vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: [Vision2020] Senator Larry Craig Challenges Guilty Plea

> All:
> In Minnesota, Larry Craig's attorney argued today before a judge to withdraw
> his guilty plea for the "disorderly conduct" misdemeanor charge that has
> hounded Craig.  They argued, if I have this correct, that Craig pled guilty
> to conduct that is not a crime.  It's like being charged with (my example)
> raping a manikin, and pleading guilty.  The guilty plea can be withdrawn,
> because there is no law making it illegal to rape a manikin.  The ACLU has
> filed a friend of the court brief alleging unconstitutional aspects of this
> case:
> http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/17/aclu.craig/index.html
> http://blog.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2007/09/craig_hearing_set_for_sept_26.html
> ---------------
> I think that arresting someone for Craig's conduct in this case is over
> zealous, and probably unconstitutional.  Craig peered into a stall, bumped
> someones foot, and his hand came under the stall divider.  This is
> disorderly conduct?  Questionable.  As to whether these actions implied a
> sexual advance, they probably did.  But this is making inferences as to
> state of mind that are also highly questionable.  There was no discussion of
> sex, in fact no discussion at all, no physical contact except bumping shoes
> (how often does this occur accidentally?), no notes passed under the stall.
> There are serious constitutional issues regarding making his conduct a
> crime, as the ACLU asserts, even if these actions implied a sexual advance.
> If Craig had pled not guilty odds are this charge would have been dropped.
> But avoiding publicity no doubt was uppermost on Craig's mind.
> The political and ethical charges of Craig's hypocrisy in promoting a
> "family values" agenda, while allegedly engaging in gay activity, are
> separate from the legal issues in this case.  It could be argued that Craig
> is representing his constituency, which is his job, even if the agenda he
> promotes contradicts the ethical implications of his personal behavior.
> Almost all politicians face this ethical compromise.  Craig did not force
> the voters of Idaho to vote overwhelmingly for a Super DOMA in 2006.
> Nonetheless, the shameless manipulation by the Republican Party of the
> sexual hysteria of the public regarding Gay behavior is a major issue that
> impacts this case politically.  The Republican's didn't just throw Craig off
> the bus, they threw him under the bus, after his "disorderly conduct"
> charges became public.  They want Craig to just go away quietly, no doubt.
> The threat of a Senate ethics investigation prompted by a misdemeanor
> disorderly conduct charge has almost no precedent, and might be an attempt
> to bully Craig into resigning:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/05/washington/05cnd-craig.html
> Investigating such a complaint, they warned, would draw the Senate into
> "reviewing and adjudging a host of minor misdemeanors and transgressions"
> even if "minor or professionally irrelevant."
> ---------
> Consider the approach taken to Senator Vitter, linked to affairs with
> prostitutes.  If Craig had faced this problem, would the attacks against him
> have been so vituperative?  Why should Craig be forced out of the US Senate
> for his conduct, and Vitter not?  A married man having sex with prostitutes
> is morally superior to a married man having gay sex?
> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296359,00.html
> Vitter, 46, apologized in July for committing a "very serious sin" and
> acknowledged his Washington phone number was among those called several
> years ago by an escort service run by Deborah Jeane Palfrey. The admission
> came after Flynt's Hustler magazine told the senator that his telephone
> number was linked to Palfrey's escort service.
> ------------------
> I hope Craig stays in the senate for the remainder of his current term, and
> resolves the case in Minnesota in his favor.  The case in Minnesota involved
> over zealous police entrapment, possibly unconstitutional, as the ACLU
> alleges.  And Craig remaining in the senate might temper the Republicans'
> manipulation of the public regarding Gay issues, while serving as a reminder
> to the public that the anti-Gay agenda of the Republican Party is shameless
> manipulation of the public's fears and anxieties.
> Ted Moffett

More information about the Vision2020 mailing list