Reply With Quote
He did not....have...sex with that man....Mr. Lewinsky.....
Oh, THAT'S what I've been doing wrong!
It's tap foot THEN contact - THEN hand motioning. Had it all bassackward (so to speak)
He did not....have...sex with that man....Mr. Lewinsky.....
(CNN) -- Sen. Larry Craig said that he "overreacted and made a poor decision" in pleading guilty to disorderly conduct after his June arrest following an incident in a Minneapolis airport bathroom.
In his first public statement on the arrest, the Idaho Republican said he did nothing 'inappropriate' and also said, "I am not gay."
A police officer who arrested him June 11 said Craig peered through a crack in a restroom stall door for two minutes and made gestures suggesting to the officer he wanted to engage in "lewd conduct."
Craig's blue eyes were clearly visible through the crack in the door, Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport police Sgt. Dave Karsnia wrote in the report he filed on the June 11 incident.
"Craig would look down at his hands, 'fidget' with his fingers, and then look through the crack into my stall again," Karsnia wrote in do ents accompanying the arrest report.
Craig said the officer misinterpreted his actions.
Senate Republican leaders are calling for an ethics committee to review.
Craig, 62, pleaded guilty August 8 to a misdemeanor disorderly conduct charge in the incident, according to Minnesota criminal records.
The officer wrote that he was on a plainclothes detail in the restroom because of citizen complaints and arrests for sexual activity there.
Karsnia wrote that when the person occupying the stall beside him left, Craig entered it and blocked the door with his rolling suitcase.
"My experience has shown that individuals engaging in lewd conduct use their bags to block the view from the front of their stall," the officer said in his report.
The senator then tapped his right foot, "a signal used by persons wishing to engage in lewd conduct," Karsnia wrote, and Craig ran his left hand several times underneath the par ion dividing the stalls.
"The presence of others did not seem to deter Craig as he moved his right foot so that it touched the side of my left foot which was within my stall area," the officer's report said.
When the police interviewed him later, the senator said that "he has a wide stance when going to the bathroom" and that was why his foot may have touched the officer's, the report said.
Craig also told police that he had reached down to the floor to pick up a piece of paper, the officer wrote.
"It should be noted that there was not a piece of paper on the bathroom floor, nor did Craig pick up a piece of paper," Karsnia wrote.
"During the interview, Craig either disagreed with me or 'didn't recall' the events as they happened."
After Craig ran his hand underneath the par ion wall three times, Karsnia held his police identification down by the floor so the senator could see it, the report said.
"With my left hand near the floor, I pointed towards the exit. Craig responded, 'No!'
"I again pointed towards the exit. Craig exited the stall with his roller bags without flushing the toilet," Karsnia wrote.
The senator initially resisted the officer's request to go to the police operations center, he said, but finally did. There, he was read his Miranda rights, interviewed, photographed, fingerprinted and released, the report said.
The Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call first reported the arrest Monday. Watch a reporter discuss how news of the arrest broke »
In a statement released Monday evening, Craig denied any inappropriate conduct and said he regrets his guilty plea, which he entered without having an attorney present.
"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," he said. "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."
Craig paid a $500 fine when he entered his guilty plea in Hennepin County Municipal Court in Bloomington, Minnesota, according to state criminal records.
In his pe ion to enter a guilty plea, Craig acknowledged that he "engaged in (physical) conduct which I knew or should have known tended to arouse alarm or resentment."
He also was required to stipulate in the statement that he would "make no claim that I am innocent of the charge to which I am entering a plea of not guilty," the do ent said.
On Tuesday, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington filed a complaint with the Senate Ethics Committee, asking that the senator's conduct be investigated. The group, which largely targets Republicans, asked the committee to probe whether Craig "violated the Senate Rules of Conduct by engaging in disorderly conduct," a statement said.
"If pleading guilty to charges stemming from an attempt to solicit an undercover officer in a public restroom is not conduct that reflects poorly upon the Senate, what is?" asked Melanie Sloan, the group's executive director, in a statement. Sloan is a former U.S. attorney in the Clinton administration's Justice Department.
Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-California, chairwoman of the Ethics Committee, declined to comment on whether an investigation would be conducted. Her office noted the committee's work is generally confidential.
A Senate aide familiar with Ethics Committee practices said ethics rules do not specifically require a member to disclose pleading guilty to a misdemeanor. But the rules require the panel to look into a matter and determine whether an investigation is appropriate once a formal complaint is lodged.
Craig resigned Monday night as a Senate liaison for former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's presidential campaign. Romney's son Josh canceled a trip to Idaho on Tuesday.
Craig, Idaho's senior senator, is married with three grown children and nine grandchildren. A former rancher, he was first elected to the Senate in 1990 after serving a decade in the House of Representatives. His seat is up for re-election in 2008.
Last fall, Craig's office publicly denied assertions by Internet blogger Mike Rogers that the senator is gay. Craig's office dismissed speculation about the senator's sexuality as "completely ridiculous."
In 1982, Craig denied rumors that he was under investigation as part of a federal probe into allegations that lawmakers on Capitol Hill had sexual relationships with congressional pages, saying the "false allegations" made him "mad as ."
He was never implicated in that investigation, which led to ethics charges against two other congressmen.
In recent years, Craig's voting record has earned him top ratings from social conservative groups such as the American Family Association, Concerned Women for America and the Family Research Council.
He has supported a federal cons utional amendment banning same-sex marriage, telling his colleagues that it was "important for us to stand up now and protect traditional marriage, which is under attack by a few unelected judges and litigious activists."
In 1996, Craig also voted in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act, which denies federal recognition to same-sex marriages and prevents states from being forced to recognize the marriages of gay and lesbian couples legally performed in other states.
Craig also has opposed expanding the federal hate crimes law to cover offenses motivated by anti-gay bias and, in 1996, voted against a bill that would have outlawed employment discrimination based on sexual orientation, which failed by a single vote in the Senate. E-mail to a friend
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/...est/index.html
He's not gay, he has a disease.
ray had a point about people marrying horses. turns out that Craig was a rancher.
Mug shot up on Drudge:
...complete with Old Glory lapel pin.
a flag pin and blue tie just screams flaming these days.
Apparently a former pledge of Craig's frat has come forward to state that Craig wanted his back in the 70s.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/ea..._id=1003631879The Statesman also spoke with a man who said Craig made a sexual advance toward him at the University of Idaho in 1967 and a man who said Craig 'cruised' him for sex in 1994 at the REI store in Boise. The Statesman also explored dozens of allegations that proved untrue, unclear or unverifiable.
...but he's not gay. These nasty rumors have just been following him around...for forty ing years.
Unless Frank has always been open about his sexuality then there was a time where he wasn't honest about what he holds himself out to be.
Not a big deal, it's just that what you intimated wasn't true.Barney Frank May 1987: U.S. representative Barney Frank remembers when he became the first congressman to come out on his own - Rebels & Pioneers
Advocate, The, Nov 12, 2002 by Barney Frank
Reaction to my coming-out helped me grasp two important points. First, most Americans aren't phobic; they just think they're supposed to be. Second, concealing our sexual orientation helps keep straight people ignorant of the personal and social costs of phobia.
As word began to circulate early in 1987 that I was thinking about finally telling people the truth about my sexuality, many of the most liberal members of Congress tried to dissuade me. They were convinced that it would diminish my effectiveness. I did not disagree, but I explained that I could no longer live the semicrazed, semisecret life of the closet.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...12/ai_94598263
Did anyone him ask before 1987?Unless Frank has always been open about his sexuality then there was a time where he wasn't honest about what he holds himself out to be.
Gotta say Craig is a dumbass for not letting Romney and other Republicans know about this before they read it in the paper.
Is that suppose to pass as the litmus test as to whether or not you're open about you're sexuality?
Never asked, don't tell? Hmmm...
It's a question. Did anyone ask him before he came out?
Can you answer the question?
OK. We know this guy is finished as a republican, and I say good. My question is:
Would he still have a job if he were a democrat being caught under the same situation?
It sound like his siblings may have:
When I got to be 13, in 1953, it dawned on me that I was gay,” Frank said during a double-interview some days ago that started out (in person) during a Gay Pride party in Manhattan and resumed 40 hours later (by telephone) from San Francisco — a city where, incidentally, the gay-marriage outside-the-law defiance does not meet with his approval.
“There I was, at 13, part of the most detested minority in the world, fully believing I could never tell anybody in the world about it in my life.”
Wasn’t there anybody with whom you could talk?
“No. Absolutely nobody in the whole world. Eventually my siblings” — two sisters, one brother — “figured it out. I must say I was probably unfair to my family.”
http://www.thevillager.com/villager_...sexuality.html
I think that qualifies as a refutation of WDT's contention that he never tried to hide his sexuality.
Again, no big deal, just trying to set the record straight
Depends on if he railed against sexuals his entire government career.
Seems like a really big deal to you. I wonder why.
I think you're the one that engaged me, other than that I would have been done with it.
You're the one who brought it up. It was that important to you.
I think there are probably degrees of hiding. There is not telling anyone, and then on the other end of the bell curve there is marrying a beard, and joining the politically gay bashing GOP. I think comparing a Congressman who has been out for decades to this fool who is into bathroom sex in his 60s and heavy into denial isn't really a valid comparison, other than they both work in the Capitol building.
And you're the one that engaged me without refuting what the point I made. In fact, you've submitted 4 post in response to me without making any points whatsoever, so not only have you been the one to make a big deal out of my post, but you've simultaneoulsy managed to make an arse out of yourself.
Two for the price of one, what a clever little fellow you are.
On the other hand, I corrected a misleading statement made by another poster (I believe that most of us, FWD included, want the truth), that hardly qualifies as making a big deal out something.
You didn't have much of a point to refute since Franks' story bears no resemblance to Craig's.
Besides -- Craig isn't gay -- he just said so.
I wasn't the one that brought Franks into the discussion (I realize that you're not implying that I did...), and I agree that the comparison wasn't a good one.
Oh, and a generic labeling of the GOP as being "gay bashing" is an outdated and unwarranted generalization.
As Barney Frank so eloquently put it, "most people aren't phobic".
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
