Geez, there’s no stopping them.
This was kept under wraps for some time, but no more.
This time, it’s not some state Congressman. It’s a full-blown United States congressman.
Sen. Larry E. Craig (R-Id) pleaded guilty earlier this month to misdemeanor disorderly-conduct charges stemming from his June arrest by an undercover police officer in a men’s restroom at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, a court spokeswoman and the senator’s office said yesterday.
Roll Call, citing a copy of a report by airport police, said officers had been conducting a sting operation inside the men’s room because of complaints of sexual activity there. The police report gives this account of the arrest:
The undercover officer was monitoring the restroom on June 11. A few minutes after noon, Craig entered and sat in the stall next to him. Craig began tapping his right foot, touched his right foot to the left foot of the officer and brushed his hand beneath the partition between them. He was then arrested.
While he was being interviewed about the incident, Craig gave police a business card showing that he is a U.S. senator. "What do you think about that?" Craig asked the officer, according to the report obtained by Roll Call.
Hmmmm. Playing footsie in an airport bathroom stall.
From the Senator’s website:
Idaho Senator Larry Craig made the following statement in response to the Roll Call story this afternoon:
"At the time of this incident, I complained to the police that they were misconstruing my actions. I was not involved in any inappropriate conduct.
"I should have had the advice of counsel in resolving this matter. In hindsight, I should not have pled guilty. I was trying to handle this matter myself quickly and expeditiously."
In a recorded interview after his arrest, Craig “either disagreed with me or ‘didn’t recall’ the events as they happened,” the report states.
Craig stated “that he has a wide stance when going to the bathroom and that his foot may have touched mine,” the report states. Craig also told the arresting officer that he reached down with his right hand to pick up a piece of paper that was on the floor.
For the record, it seems to me that the foot-tapping thing from the police report is, well, you know, kinda thin. I honestly think that Craig probably did have a good defense. What exactly about what he did — the foot-tapping, according to the police report — is "lewd" or "disorderly"? I accept that his rather obscure actions must be known to be typical cruising signals, but I don’t see how they could be against the law just standing on their own.
But see, then he went and pled guilty.
* Voted YES on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. (Jun 2006)
* Voted NO on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes. (Jun 2002)
* Voted NO on expanding hate crimes to include sexual orientation. (Jun 2000)
* Voted YES on prohibiting same-sex marriage. (Sep 1996)
* Voted NO on prohibiting job discrimination by sexual orientation. (Sep 1996)
As far back as 1982, Craig (when he was in the House) was denying hanky-panky with congressional pages, as this ABC News segment reports:
Presidential candidate Mitt Romney has removed Craig’s video endorsement from his website. Smart move, but TPM has the video of Larry Craig, the co-chair of the Mitt Romney campaign, explaining why he supports Romney’s candidacy. Craig says:
Knowing Governor Mitt Romney is knowing someone who, first and foremost, has very strong family values. That is something I grew up with and believe in.
Greenwald: "If having "strong family values" is — as Craig claims — the reason "first and foremost" to support someone’s candidacy for President, then, by definition, whether one has "strong family values" is a politically relevant consideration for such a person. Craig’s own pronounced political standards render it relevant whether a married political official with children is having anonymous sex in bathrooms. That is just logically true."
UPDATE: Craig in 1999:
MR. RUSSERT: Larry Craig, would you want the last word from the Senate be an acquittal of the president and no censure?
SEN. CRAIG: Well, I don’t know where the Senate’s going to be on that issue of an up or down vote on impeachment, but I will tell you that the Senate certainly can bring about a censure reslution and it’s a slap on the wrist. It’s a, “Bad boy, Bill Clinton. You’re a naughty boy.”
The American people already know that Bill Clinton is a bad boy, a naughtyboy.
I’m going to speak out for the citizens of my state, who in the majority think that Bill Clinton is probably even a nasty, bad, naughty boy.
UPDATE: Guess The Singing Senators need a new lead vocalist.