Coy Craig considers course correction?

September 25, 2007

It’s Sept. 25, meaning that Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) will officially give up his Senate seat in just five days, right? I wouldn’t bet on it.

Idaho Republican Sen. Larry Craig declined to say Tuesday whether he would resign his seat as planned if his guilty plea stemming from a Minneapolis bathroom sex sting is not overturned this week.

“We are waiting for the legal determinations and I have nothing more to say,” Craig told reporters Tuesday.

The senator would not comment on what he would do if the court case were not decided by Sunday, the original date of his planned resignation from the Senate.

A county judge in Minnesota will hear Craig’s case tomorrow morning, though it’s unclear when we’ll hear a final ruling. Craig will not attend the court hearing, preferring instead to act like a normal senator on Capitol Hill.

Not that he’s necessarily welcome. Reporters asked Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell about Craig’s uncertain future, and The Hill said McConnell “appeared visibly unnerved” by the question, before saying, “I really don’t have anything to add on that issue to what I said a couple of weeks ago.”

The prosecutor in Minneapolis, meanwhile, has plenty to say.

Greg Sargent noted that prosecutor Christopher Renz submitted his filing yesterday, and made a pretty compelling case that it’s far too late for Craig to go back now. Renz detailed his discussions with the senator:

* In response to Craig’s questions as to what would happen if he pled guilty, the prosecutor explained that his guilty plea would be a matter of public record.

* The prosecutor noted drolly that Craig told him that “he was in a difficult situation as a result of the nature of the charges and his position as a United States Senator.”

* The prosecutor noted that in all conversations, Craig “seemed calm, intellegent and methodical in his questions. At no time during the conversations, did the Defendant appear to have a tone or sense of urgency, panic, or overt emotion.”

Perhaps best of all, Craig wrote a handwritten note to the prosecutor profusely thanking him for his help.

Well, that’s not a good sign for Craig at all.

I, however, have a new, unexplored idea: presidential pardon. Why doesn’t Bush simply intervene, condemn the prosecution as “judicial activism,” and help out a conservative Republican senator who’s voted with the president’s policies every possible change for nearly seven years?

Bush values loyalty, doesn’t he?

What the hell is Craig’s problem? He shouldn’t have bothered trying to fight this thing at all. His defense from start to finish should have been that the penalty he was agreeing to was tiny and so that it wasn’t worth his time to fight such a silly charge in court. That’s it. He should have always have insisted that the charge was absurd, but that it really didn’t matter and didn’t bother him at all.

But now he’s just dragging things out, which was what he was trying to avoid in the first place. And it’s quite unlikely he’ll prevail. And in the meantime, he’s wasting taxpayer money, all just to fight a PR battle that he’s less likely to win with his defense than the one I just gave. My best guess is that the people now helping him can charge more by dragging things through court.

  • I, however, have a new, unexplored idea: presidential pardon.

    I was thinking about this last week, but I just figured that Bush would consider a pardon tacit approval of the behavior everyone knows Craig is guilty of .

    It’s not like Bush won’t get a replacement sycophant, anyway. I’m sure he’s glad that this has taken some media attention away from him and Iraq. By pardoning, Bush brings himself into a story he doesn’t want part of.

    Besides, Bush reserves his pardons for those who commit treason on his behalf, not those looking for love in all the wrong public places.

  • Yes, the prosecutor doesn’t indicate that Craig was terribly disturbed about the whole shebang while it was going on and not public knowledge. The prosecutor notes that he had several conversations with Craig about procedures, gave him advice about getting a lawyer, gave him extra time to consider his plea by way of a continuance of the original due date for the plea. He certainly didn’t rush Craig through the process and in fact was very accommodating.

    On the very last page of the prosecutor’s statement, he notes that another defendant arrested under the same circumstances asked to have his guilty plea changed after Craig publicly announced his plan to ask to change his plea. I don’t imagine that Minnesota is going to want to set a precedent with Craig and then be flooded with others who want to change their guilty pleas. I guess we’ll just have to see what the judge in this matter does.

  • Bush would only show mercy and pardon Craig if Craig could testify about Bush’s wrongdoings. Since Craig doesn’t work for the White House as Skooter did, why should Bush care what happens to him? I can’t see Bush act as a compassionate conservative if he has nothing to gain from it. Come on people. Haven’t we learned anything about George W Bush and his loyalty after almost seven years of watching him cover his own ass?

  • Yes, Craig is an idiot, but let’s hope he not only changes his mind about resigning but also runs again. It will the give the GOP fits, and that’s always good.

  • nothing wrong for Craig to drag it out longer. All the more headaches for the RNC election committee. Would be interesting to see how Craig would explain that to his constituents at home?

    “I need a wide stance when using the bathroom to get rid of all that ‘bull’shit I’m feeding you all” Pun intended LOL

  • Dr. BB nails it.

    Coy Craig considers course correction?

    CB, I love your ’60s Batman-series style alliterative post-titles.

  • CB, I love your ’60s Batman-series style alliterative post-titles.

    Or maybe they’re not all alliterative, but you’ve done a bunch of funny post titles that remind me of that.

  • I just don’t know how to feel about Craig’s Minnesota appeal. On the one hand, I support the rule of law — he pled guilty knowingly, so why shouldn’t that plea stand. We all know that he only pled guilty because he thought it was a way to keep the whole thing from becoming public and now that it has, he figures he might as well fight it. That is not a reason to overturn the plea. So a big part of me says — let the guilty plea stand.

    On the other hand, if the guilty plea is overturned, there is no way the prosecutor is not going to pursue a court case on the charges. It would just be wonderful watching the Republicans squirning as the trial was covered in all its seamy detail!

    Of course, another fun possibility would be the court upholding the guilty plea and Craig then refusing to resign on the grounds that it was only a minor misdemeanor charge.

    The possibility I least look forward to is the guilty plea being upheld and Craig going ahead with his resignation. That would be such a let down. PLEASE, Arlen Spector, give Craig another call to buck him up and encourage him to fight this!

  • The guy pled down to a misdemeanor in a dubious sting operation hoping the incident would pass without notice. There’s not enough evidence to convict him of being eccentric, much less to any of the actual charges. The poor guy’s a closet bisexual full of self loathing and has suffered enough. It should be up to him, taking account of the sentiment of his constituents in Idaho, as to whether he continues as Senator or not, irrespective of the decision concerning his guilty plea.

    I’m from Idaho, but believe me, I can’t stand Craig and his policies and his hypocrisy, and from what I’ve seen of him, I’d no more want to have a beer with him than George Bush. But I’ve got a heart, and what the Republicans have done to him is cruel and unconscionable.

    That said, I am enjoying the spectacle, as the Republicans suffer through a disastrous situation that they brought on themselves through their despicable homophobia.

  • “I, however, have a new, unexplored idea: presidential pardon.”

    Even if Bush was so inclined, he does not have the power to pardon Craig for a violation of Minnesota state law. Craig needs that relief to come from Governor Pawlenty.

  • “I, however, have a new, unexplored idea: presidential pardon.” — CB

    Does a chill run up your spine when you realize you’ve spent so much time analyzing the Right that you can pseudo-think like one?

  • Although I agree that Craig deserves whatever happens to him…I think the sting operation is not only a waste of time and money but should be illegal. What business is it of the government if he wants to pick up a “date” ? If he had solicted a woman…no one would have noticed or said anything derogatory about him. Vitter gets off scot free….and that’s the Republican scum for you….although isn’t it illegal to pay for sex with a hooker? Since I lead a very sheltered life, I don’t know the answer to that.

  • The poor guy’s a closet bisexual

    Amazing as it is to some people, I think gay guys that marry women are just gay. They’re using these women to look hetero. They’re not bi.

  • Amazing as it is to some people, I think gay guys that marry women are just gay. They’re using these women to look hetero. They’re not bi.

    This seems to be a common practice that comes up again and again. The aftermath is what makes me think it’s what I claim it is- the guys’ wives divorce them. I think when they stay, the guy is just keeping up the con, successfully leading the wife on to think he’s bi.

    Women may be prone to seeing it the other way, and I think that’s vanity.

  • Swan 15,16

    Actually, conservatives don’t take sexual attraction into account. It is behavior ONLY that makes one’s sexuality to them

    A man who is sexually attracted to other men and only has sex with a woman, no matter how infrequently, is STRAIGHT.

    Once you understand that, you can understand the fundamentalist mind much better.
    It only hurts for a few hours, so don’t panic.

    • Comments are closed.