<div>All:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>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 The guilty plea can be withdrawn, because there is no law making it illegal to rape a manikin.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:
</div>
<div> </div>
<div><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/17/aclu.craig/index.html">http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/09/17/aclu.craig/index.html</a></div>
<div> </div>
<div><a href="http://blog.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2007/09/craig_hearing_set_for_sept_26.html">http://blog.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2007/09/craig_hearing_set_for_sept_26.html</a></div>
<div>---------------</div>
<div>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.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>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.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>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:
</div>
<div> </div>
<div><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/05/washington/05cnd-craig.html">http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/05/washington/05cnd-craig.html</a></div>
<div>
<p>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." </p>
<p>---------</p>
<p>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?
</p>
<p><a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296359,00.html">http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,296359,00.html</a></p>
<p>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.
</p>
<p>------------------</p></div>
<div>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.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Ted Moffett</div>