Larry Craig's Latest Defense: the Cop Started It

Posted by Steven Reynolds, The All Spin Zone at 1:12 PM on January 9, 2008.

The toe-tapper was in court again trying to clear his name. this time he's challenging whether the crime he admitted to was actually a crime. So what was he pleading guilty to if not a crime? Stupidity?

The biggest misdemeanor case in Minnesota history is still rolling along, as Senator Larry Craig's lawyers try more arguments to try to reverse his guilty plea. Here's the scoop from the Pioneer Press:

The undercover police officer who busted U.S. Sen. Larry Craig in a gay-sex sting in an airport bathroom stall couldn't have been offended by the senator's notorious foot-tapping - after all, the officer invited the action by tapping his own foot, lawyers for the congressman said in a brief filed Tuesday.

Those lawyers also contend the Idaho Republican should have his guilty plea to a disorderly conduct charge thrown out because what he did last June wasn't a crime. The reason: The state's disorderly conduct statute says the conduct in question has to alarm or anger others - plural - and Craig's actions affected just the undercover officer.

"In short, the facts here simply do not constitute the crime of disorderly conduct," the lawyers wrote in a 96-page brief. "The conduct ... viewed in its worst light, does not rise to the level of disorderly as that conduct is contemplated under Minnesota law."

Despite Craig's voluntary guilty plea, if the facts don't support the charge, the plea is inaccurate and should be thrown out, the brief contends.

Of course, Mr. Craig was involved in making US law for years and years and years. One would assume a minimal level of savvy as to the law when you've got that kind of experience. Still, Larry Craig pled guilty to what he claims is a false charge. Why? Of course, this is the reason the last judge denied his appeal, that by every measure Larry Craig was competent to plead guilty:

In October, Hennepin County District Judge Charles Porter ruled there was no good reason to let Craig withdraw his plea. Calling some of the senator's legal arguments "illogical" and "circular," the judge said Craig was "a career politician with a college education" who "is of, at least, above-average intelligence. He knew what he was saying, reading and signing."

What's amazing is that anyone would believe anthing this man says. The Idaho Statesman has now found a few men who have stepped forward to claim they've had sex with Craig. Craig promised he would resign and then reneged on that promise. Heck, even his lawyers are lying blatantly. From the Star Tribune:

In a written statement Tuesday, Craig's attorney Billy Martin said: "Throughout this trying time, Sen. Craig has maintained his innocence and has remained a dedicated public servant who continues to serve the people of Idaho with honor and distinction as he has done for the past 27 years."

No, they are simply wrong. Mr. Craig was not protesting his innocence when he pled guilty. He was doing the exact opposite. As a judge I'd find that statement highly offensive, a manipulation through the press. But I'm fairly certain this toe-tapping strategy is going to fly about as far as the last one, not very far.

Larry Craig needs to retire.

Tagged as: republican hypocrisy, craig, lewd conduct

Steven Reynolds is a regular blogger for the All Spin Zone