Larry Craig reaches out to GOP colleagues

September 13, 2007

Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho), who still wants to salvage his career and public standing after his infamous bathroom arrest, is clearly running out of time. He’s working on the criminal charges in Minneapolis, he’s petitioning the Senate Ethics Committee, but if Craig is serious about keeping his seat and serving the rest of his term, he’s going to have to find some Republican colleagues who want to pull him out from under the bus.

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) has rallied to Craig’s defense, but Roll Call reports today that the Idaho Republican is turning his attention to the other 47 Senate Republicans.

[Craig] trying to restore his reputation among his Republican Senate colleagues by sharing with them his latest legal filings and apologizing for any distraction he has caused.

Craig filed a formal motion in Minnesota District Court on Monday to withdraw his guilty plea for lewd conduct in a Minneapolis airport bathroom. That same day, Craig sent a copy of his appeal to his fellow GOP Senators, along with a personally signed letter of regret and an offer to provide further information as his case moves ahead.

The embattled Senator, who has said he intends to resign on Sept. 30 unless he is able to have his guilty plea thrown out, wrote to Senators: “I regret the distraction this situation has caused at a time when the attention of the Senate, and the nation, should be on the war and other serious policy issues.

“Nevertheless, should you be interested in the facts of my case and the efforts I am making, I encourage you to review the enclosed,” Craig continued in the brief memo. “If you would like any additional information, please don’t hesitate to contact me personally, or my office.”

Craig is also continuing to act like a regular ol’ member of the Senate. Yesterday, despite the fact that he has not returned to DC since announcing his intention to step down, Craig even issued a press statement praising Gen. David Petraeus and Amb. Ryan Crocker, explaining his belief that their testimony “told a positive story,” and arguing that Bush’s policy is “making progress.”

So, any chance this might help improve Craig’s standing? Not so much.

A senior GOP Senate aide said it appears Craig wants Senators to know “he is fighting the charges against him.” And, this staffer added, “he has nothing left to lose” in trying to save face with a party that has shown him little support in recent weeks. […]

It’s no secret that Senate Republican leaders would like the scandal to extinguish entirely. After all, it was just hours after news broke of the incident that the leadership called for an ethics inquiry into Craig’s arrest. GOP leaders also worked swiftly to pressure the veteran Idaho Senator to step aside and put to bed broader questions about the party’s ongoing ethical lapses and charges of corruption.

Another Senate GOP aide said, despite Craig’s latest outreach, most Senators still feel “the story is done, the door is closed. This is not about people not liking or liking him. This was business.”

Those sentiments appear to be widespread, and several Republican Senators privately suggested Wednesday that even as Craig looks to save face both legally and personally, they simply would rather put the matter behind them.

One senator wondered aloud what would happen if Craig actually made progress in reversing his guilty plea in Minneapolis. “I think we were all real happy to have the Craig thing in the rearview mirror, and to have it keep coming up again and again just isn’t a good situation,” the Senator said, adding, “What happens if he does get this thing overturned?”

Stay tuned.

Larry Craig reaches out to GOP colleagues

…From underneath a bathroom stall? Eeeeew!

Get this guy outta here already. He’s not just bad for Republicans, you know. He’s bad for the nation.

  • “This is not about people not liking or liking him. This was business.”

    Sounds like the Republicans have adopted the ethics of the Corleone family.

    Which isn’t anything new, is it?

  • A question for anyone who might know–CB, will you weigh in? One bit of conventional wisdom relating to l’affaire Craig is that the GOP had no problem with throwing Craig under the bus because Idaho is a “safe” state for them. But is this really true? Is there any chance we might see the right kind of populist Democrat, one out of the mold of Montana’s recently elected governor, who might make it possible for the Dems to pick up Craig’s seat? Just wondering.

  • I don’t blame Craig. If the President and his extended staff can overtly lie to the legislative branch under oath, violate the Constitution, and have no repercussions, why should his relatively mild overtures in an airport bathroom have any consequences?

  • Senator Craig has really blown it this time, he needs to stop trying to jerk us around. All of this groveling on his knees is just making things harder to swallow.

  • Another Senate GOP aide said, despite Craig’s latest outreach, most Senators still feel “the story is done, the door is closed.

    That may be true, but Larry Craig is still trying to make eye contact through the crack.

  • Is there any chance we might see the right kind of populist Democrat, one out of the mold of Montana’s recently elected governor, who might make it possible for the Dems to pick up Craig’s seat? — Kishin
    Last year, democrats were able to make unsuccessful but formidable challenges to the governor’s seat and ID-01, so yeah, democrats exist even in Idaho. Larry Larocco has been suggested as the nominee for Idaho’s senate seat.

    Idaho is considered a “safe” seat for republicans in the sense that with a republican governor, a republican would be appointed to the seat if Craig resigned, which is less likely in Louisiana with a democratic governor.

    Of course, considering Foley last year, gay scandals are particularly embarrassing to conservative anti-gay republicans, so that’s probably the bigger factor here.

  • As much as I find Craig’s politics repugnant, as suits a Rethuglican, and his overall behavior pretty stupid, the entrapment apparatus in evidence at the Minneapolis airport is equally repugnant. I’m not trying to invite more sanctimonious posts about “it’s a public facility, and I don’t want to be confronted, blah, blah, blah”, and “what about my kid going in there, etc.?” Those are different and separate issues.

    The point, and my point is strictly a legal one, is there was no actual sexual activity between the cop and Craig, and we don’t know whether there would have been any. Many men in that restroom would never have known what was (allegedly) going on, what little there was of it, in the first place, and had the cop not encouraged Craig there would be no issue, let alone a crime. And if the cop was reasonably sure something illegal might happen, he could have had the good sense to warn Craig rather than arresting him. Traffic cops routinely give people warnings for speeding and other infractions, rather than tickets. Driving offenses are far more dangerous than what was going on in that restroom.

    So what is likely to happen if Craig gets his guilty plea to “disorderly behavior” withdrawn? Maybe a trial with fuller and very public revelations of what happened. Is there enough evidence to convict? We may find out. Maybe the DA will refuse to prosecute by virtue of insufficient evidence, and what would that say? Mostly that the police should use their limited resources more wisely than for reruns of outdated entrapment schemes, or if sexual activity in a public place is a problem, then the cop should wait for some real sexual activity to take place before showing a badge and making an arrest. Mostly they will have to demonstrate how they knew that Craig’s behavior represented the intent to commit a crime. And since when is merely the possible intent to commit a crime actually a crime? That alone should scare the pants off everyone (pun intended), including the judge.

    Craig has to be one of the stupidest men alive, aside from being a repugnant hypocrite, but the issues involved in this case are bigger than his sexuality, whatever it is. Except in this country where things sexual, especially homosexual, are constantly treated senselessly and very immaturely, that we are subjected to media driven mock Victorian and puritancial shock.

    In any case the Gay Old Party won’t like drawn out, and repeated media coverage of this nonsense. Which is the only part of it that gives me any comfort.

  • It doesn’t matter either way. No one punsihes Republicans anymore (they, unlike we little people, are above the law by Divine Right). And he’d no doubt be replaced by another of his ilk. Gay or not, the politics would remain the same. Ugh.

    Incidentally, who cares what kind of sex a GOP wants? They’re all old and ugly as sin and are totally lacking in redeeming social characterstics. They can only get sex by paying for it.

  • So when does David Vitter get run out of the caucus on a rail? If I didn’t know better, I might think that homophobia and political calculation (Craig’s replacement gets chosen by a Republican, Vitter’s by a Democrat) were behind this strangely differing treatment of the two Senators.

  • Oh Lord, if Craig was reaching out to me I’d run like the wind. In fact, I’d never have shaken his hand if I’d had any idea where it had been.

  • He should be able to keep his seat. After all, it’s hard to knock someone off their seat who has such a wide stance. Not to mention a low centre of gravity.

  • I talked to some gay guys at work and asked about the nasty details of cruising for gay sex in the men’s room. Craig’s behavior was standard operating procedure. He peeked through the stall crack to see if there was worthy prey. Apparently, he liked the looks of the young blonde Karsnia sitting on the crapper and so entered the adjacent stall. Craig’s foot tapping was a sign that he was interested and the cop’s tap back said he was interested too. Craig’s touching the cop’s foot said, “Let’s do it, baby!” Craig’s hand sweep under the stall divider was an invitation for Karsnia, with his pants down around his ankles, to sit on his “haunches” and slide his knees under the divider into Craig’s stall so that Craig could provide oral sex. Apparently, this kind of thing goes on all the time. Who knew? It seems appropriate that Craig has hired Monica Lewinsky’s public relations expert. At least Lewinsky had the class to provide her public service in a private residence.

  • I do so hope that the judge *will* throw out the guilty plea; watching the rethugs squirm when Craig refuses to go gently into that good night will be good, clean, fun.

    I think it would also be better for us, politically, if he stays. Given that his temporary replacement is gonna be another rethug, I’d as soon *not* have him earning recognition for the next 14 months. Let whoever is chosen by GOP as a competition to the Dem candidate as a permanent replacement be an unknown — it’ll reduce his chances, if only slightly.

  • Craig’s hand sweep under the stall divider was an invitation for Karsnia, with his pants down around his ankles, to sit on his “haunches” and slide his knees under the divider into Craig’s stall so that Craig could provide oral sex.

    I’m really having trouble picturing this. Wouldn’t Craig have to get on the floor, too?

    What a sordid mess…

  • Hillary C,

    Senator Craig has really blown it this time, he needs to stop trying to jerk us around. All of this groveling on his knees is just making things harder to swallow.

    LOL! Well done!

  • “I think we were all real happy to have the Craig thing in the rearview mirror”

    Lets not forget the blind spot.

    CB – did you really need to say “reaches out” – that just brought an icky picture into my head.

  • In response to Gilberto’s post #17.

    Most gay guys that I know do not participate in this behavior. This is reserved for guys that are repressed or have some shame about their sexuality (a result of our heterocentric society, strongest in those red states). Participators are known to be “closeted,” sometimes married, or men who have sex with men, not necessarily “gay.” I believe that “gay” is an identity, it is not just about who you have sex with. A gay guy who is comfortable with himself can have sex with his partner, friends, meet someone at a bar or the internet just like straight people do.

    Not related to your post: I think it is perfectly reasonable for Larry C. to proclaim he is “not gay.” It is too simple to just label him as so. He was looking to have sex with another man, how do we know he doesn’t have sex with his wife? I think we need to start thinking more about the complexity of sexuality and identiy. Having sex with the same gender doesn’t necessarily mean your “gay.”

  • Anney, that’s my understanding, that both participants are basically sitting on the floor, the cop in his haunches and the elected official on his hands and knees. AJ, you’re right of course. Most gay dudes probably don’t have anonymous sex in the men’s room, just old farts who can’t come to terms with their identity. The gay guys I know are fairly normal. The two dudes who live in our culdesac are pretty tame. Their idea of a wild night is watching Matlock and eating microwave popcorn. I assume they have sex in their bedroom and not in the men’s room at the airport.

  • live in Minneapolis/Hennepin County where the “bathroom” incident occurred. It has received a lot of media coverage here, mostly because it has received national and international coverage. The Internet and email creates an interesting phenomena here when we have a local event that goes national/global. If you have dealt with a reporter before and are on good terms they will email you asking about the now prominent story. With local reporters this happens even more. Nothing wrong with this. It provides “local flavor” for the requester and we get a chance to update the requester on our areas of interests.

    I put Senator Craig’s chances of plea reversal at “slim to none”. The bar is very high and 99+% of defendants have fewer financial and legal resources so you would open a “can of worms” if a senator was allowed to change his plea. A lawyer is sworn to confidentiality with clients. Craig would likely have high end lawyers who would be very unlikely to “leak” the information to TMZ.com or TheSmokingGun.com Craig had six weeks before he made his absentia plea. What has changed but is unspoken is that Senator Craig was “outed”. By who we still don’t know. To use a stretched analogy it’s like having the key potential witness against you die and then you “just happen” to have “buyers remorse” for your guilty plea

    My guess is that some group to the left or some political consultant “scoured” the public records. What they got was “the dog catching the tailpipe”. Craig was “outed” and there is potential hypocrisy there. That is true but the republicans did not come to Craig’s defense. The logical comparison is Bill Clinton’s “bimbo eruptions”. A lot of people on the left made fools of themselves “Defending Clinton’s privates” and the Craig case is dredging up this comparison.

    Also, there is an element of the gay community that is more Foucault/Marxist/deconstructionist then really “gay” though they operate under the gay/lesbian mantel. Locally they have been flooding the Op Ed’s on the Craig thing basically saying that this is no different than a man trying to pick up a woman. It doesn’t fly well in the court of public opinion. Public restrooms are a “sanctuary” of sorts. I compare it to people doing weird things on airplanes. Different rules apply. There are sanctuary places like locker rooms, public restrooms and public restrooms. Let’s say that you are changing or showering in a locker room and someone snaps a web phone picture of you and posts it on the Internet. Would you feel violated? I would.

    I’m sure most jurors would and would put them in a jail cell with “Spike”. With Craig “entrapment” is often cited as a defense. Entrapment is subjective but it basically requires that you were naive to the activity. Craig has two things going against him here. First off, the audio tape demonstrates that Craig “knew the lingo” in the discussion with the cop. That’s a strong negative for Criag because the jurors will probably think “I don’t know that lingo”. Second there is the ongoing newspaper investigative reporting about Craig’s alleged cruising. This is called “pattern”.

    A jury trial would be a “sight to behold” but I don’t think it would help the democrats or the gay community. The “gay marriage” thing is based on the idea of a lot of gay and lesbians in stable relationships. This is true but the gay community avoids discussing “the dark underbelly”. The public senses that it exists and is not reported. They tend to pay attention to these “anomalies”.

    Some defense lawyers have been on local media claiming the /Craig case was “winnable.”. This seems to basically involve the “John Gotti defense” where everyone knew that Gotti had a reputation as a mobster but the claim was that the police were trying to “frame” him. In the case of Gotti (or for that matter the Hell’s Angels) was the public perception that they did not prey on the public. Bathroom cruisers do give the perception of preying on the public.

    The vast majority of gays don’t engage in cruising. My Minneapolis Longfellow neighborhood has a lot of (mostly older) gay male homeowners. Nice people who have settled down. I talked to a few and they claimed that they were as clueless about the bathroom cruising signals as I was.

    In our neighborhood, which has one of the best bicycle path systems in the US we have what might be called “polite gay cruising”. You like to stop and talk to people and you suspect that some of these are the “polite cruisers”. Switch the subject to “dating women” and they get the message and change the focus. With the sex part out of the way I’ve become friends with a number of theses gays. I asked a few about “procedure” used by Craig and the cop. They said that it was news to them and they basically learned about it from the news. There is something to this, especially with these “baby boomer” gays that survived the AIDS epidemic.

    The silence of gays on the “cruisers” is “deafening”. Sad since most gay males don’t do this.

  • I’d like to correct a comment above about what went on in the men’s room being safer than a traffic violation.

    This is definitely NOT true. A poor gay guy doing that kind of thing might accidentally come on to enough far right republicans to finally hit on one who is straight and get shot or beaten to death.

    Aside from that, the Craig issue is nauseating. I wonder if any of the social conservatives are straight and have normal sex lives?

    And BTW, why aren’t the Dumbocrats making a lot of noise about Sen. Craig’s right to be gay and stay in the closet if he wants to?

  • Senator Larry Craig deserves a second chance.
    He has accepted responsibility for his actions and paid his fines.
    The hypocrisy of his family values stance and personal behavior notwithstanding.
    If hypocrisy is a barrier to public service then you all must resign.
    The Democrats elected to end the war but continuing to fund it.
    The Republicans continuing to support the war as the death toll rises.
    The War on Terror breeds more terrorists.
    The War on Drugs finances the terrorists.
    The only war our government is winning is the War on Freedom in America.
    So, give Larry a break and bring our troops home now.
    Vote for Ron Paul.

  • I find the Conservatives who defend Vitter so disingenuous when they say the difference in Craig and Vitter is not the gay nature of the sex but that it was a public solicitation. Does this mean that if Vitter solicits a street prostitute he would be in trouble, but because his misadventure was with a “by appointment only” call girl it’s ok? That’s as bad as Clintons “meaning of the word is” defense. I’m sure it’s really because his replacement would be chosen by a Democrate. It only proves all politicians, both Dems and Republicans, are only interested in being in power, not that they have any actual standards.

    • Comments are closed.