The GOP’s best anti-Craig weapon

September 30, 2007

It must be terribly frustrating for the Senate Republican leadership, knowing there’s not much they can do to force embattled Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) to go away.

The party can take away his committee assignments, but that’s already happened and it didn’t have much of an effect. Officials can withhold re-election campaign funds next year, but in Craig’s case, that probably won’t matter. Republican leaders can pretend he doesn’t exist, stop returning his calls, and no longer let him sit at the cool kids’ table in the Senate dining room, but Craig seems immune to peer pressure at this point.

GOP leaders do have one tool left — an ethics committee investigation — and the party will apparently use it to make Craig absolutely miserable.

Worried that the disgraced lawmaker intends to remain in the Senate indefinitely, they are threatening to notch up the public humiliation by seeking an open ethics hearing on the restroom scandal that enveloped Craig last month.

The Senate hearing would examine the original charges in Craig’s case, including the allegation of “interference with privacy,” for peeping into the bathroom stall occupied by an undercover police officer. One senior Republican aide imagined “witnesses, documents, all in front of the klieg lights.” The committee also could look for “a pattern of conduct” — which means combing court records in other locales to discover whether Craig had prior arrests that haven’t come to light.

What do you suppose the chances are Craig has faced related, still-unknown charges elsewhere?

Meanwhile, mcjoan notes that back in Idaho, Craig hasn’t even ruled out running again in 2008.

“The only thing I can predict right now is that Larry Craig will not be running for the Senate seat in 2008,” said Dan Whiting, the senator’s spokesman in Washington, D.C.

Even though Whiting and Craig’s Boise spokesman Sid Smith have told the press Craig will not seek a fourth term, the senator has not publicly made that declaration himself, Whiting noted…. (emphasis added)

As for whether there’s any chance Craig will resign Sunday, Whiting offered little insight, saying, “If there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s that I cannot predict the future.”

I can only imagine the ferocity of the primary fight if Craig actually tries to keep his career going. It’s been ugly since August, but it would definitely get worse.

Yes, and Craig’s lawyer has already hinted that this will touch off a round of political MAD.

Sen. Craig (R-Bathroom Stall) once was allowed to sit at the cool kids table and I doubt he’s forgotten all juicy gossip his former BFFs talked about over the brandy and cigars [looks at David Vitter].

Craig could make himself the GOP version of Larry Flynt by asking for dirt (under the guise of bringing family values to The Capitol) and spend all of his spare time filing complaint after complaint with the Ethics Committee. I’m willing to bet that’s why the ReThugs are still talking about the EC (and they have to remember what it is and what “ethics” means). They’re trying to frighten him off without actually doing anything that would make him to retaliate.

Now I know how aliens feel when they fly over the planet . “Heh look at these morons. They’ve made nuclear weapons and if one guy kills the other guy, the first guy dies too. Popcorn?”

tAiO

p.s. When did Hastert announce he was retiring?

  • What do you suppose the chances are Craig has faced related, still-unknown charges elsewhere?

    Given all the publicity since August, I would be amazed if there is another arrest out there that hasn’t come to light. However, I would expect that there are other “stall lurkers” who haven’t been heard from.

    Also, if you remember back when the Mark Foley scandal broke, it flushed a number of gay Repubs out of the closet and there were all sorts of rumors of more outings to come. I suspect that is what has the Repubs in such a panic over Craig. He probably is in a position to out a lot of other Repubs, many of whom are probably already known to the Washington press corps, but their secrets are still underwraps.

    Old Larry could probably cut a wide swath through the Repubs in Washington and that is what has them in a cold sweat.

  • … if there have been rumors about Craig being ‘gay’ for the last 20 years, how come the media hasn’t been able to uncover it?

    Maybe we should ask Ken Star to look into it. Remember him? The one with the golden touch during the Clinton Impeachment. 🙂

  • Thanks Steve.

    Hmmm. Craig submitted his guilty plea on Aug 1. On the 27th the story broke.

    Now, I’m not sayin’ Dennys Hastert knew anything about this before the 27th.

    But I’m also not sayin’ that he didn’t.

    And I’m also not sayin’ he decided he didn’t want to be around for a play-by-play recap of other GOP scandals, especially that one that started about this time last year.

    [/tinfoil hat]

  • Actually the story is factually wrong. They did not strip him of his committees. He is still on them and there have been photos in the press of him attending hearings.

    What McConnell did was take away his seniority, which meant his ranking membership on Veterans Affairs and I think an appropriations subcommittee.

    It is very surprising that there has been no press report that points out McConnell did not have the authority to do that. Only a vote of the whole Republican Conference can take seniority. So Craig could reclaim it at any time under the rules.

    Bruno’s comment is intriguing. I read the Idaho Statesman article and it seemed to debunk all the gay rumors about Craig. The had one anonymous source claim to have an encounter with him, but the story suggested he was not credible.

    And after a month of intense media, it is worth noting that no a single man has come forward with a story about having sex with Craig.

    And the GOP talking about a public spectacle of an ethic investigation is silly. They don’t run the Senate anymore. If the Dems and Barbara Boxer were saying that I might take it more seriously.

  • it is worth noting that no a single man has come forward with a story about having sex with Craig.

    What about married men?

    Nice job apologizing for Craig. But I ain’t buying it. The police report is a hell of a lot more credible than the lack of any reportage of tell-all tabloid confessions from his former liasons.

    If all of his encounters were anonymous bathroom-stall glory holes, then there could be lots of reasons why they might not be willing or able to come forward– if they even remember his face.

  • In Idaho it is well known that when Larry was in college he was much more fond of men. But how does one prove that? I do not care if he is straight or gay….what I care about is his ablilty to boldly lie again and again. That is not acceptable!

  • And after a month of intense media, it is worth noting that no a single man has come forward with a story about having sex with Craig.

    Nope, and he was never charged with, nor did he plead guilty to, having sex with anyone. He plead guilt to disorderly conduct and then proceeded to make himself the ring-leader of the ensuing media circus. The GOP are the clowns freaking out and falling down over a misdemeanor charge because, like Craig, they’re all ‘phobes. If he’d been charged with pinching women on the butt it would be the GOP v. The Feminazis to defend Sen. WideStance.

    • Comments are closed.