Senate Panel Rebukes Craig Over Sex Sting

Ethics Committee Says Idaho Senator Acted Improperly In Airport Men's Room Sex Sting

(CBS/AP)  The Senate Ethics Committee said Wednesday that Idaho Sen. Larry Craig acted improperly in connection with a men's room sex sting last year and had brought discredit on the Senate.

In a letter to the Republican senator, the ethics panel said Craig's attempt to withdraw his guilty plea after his arrest at a Minneapolis airport was an effort to evade legal consequences of his own actions.

Craig's actions constitute "improper conduct which has reflected discreditably on the Senate," the letter said.

In an e-mailed statement, Craig told The Associated Press he disagreed with the ethics panel's action.

"While I am disappointed and strongly disagree with the conclusions reached by the Senate Ethics Committee, from the outset I have encouraged the committee to act in a timely fashion and they have done so. I will continue to serve the people of Idaho," he said.

The six members of the committee - three Democrats and three Republicans - told Craig they believed he "committed the offense to which you pled guilty" and that "you entered your plea knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently."

The panel said Craig only tried to remove his guilty plea after his attempts to avoid public disclosure had failed.

"Your claims to the court ... to the effect that your guilty plea resulted from improper pressure or coercion, or that you did not, as a legal matter, know what you were doing when you pled guilty do not appear credible," the letter said.

Kevin Richert, the editorial page editor of the Idaho Statesman, told CBS Radio News he is curious to see how this will play out back in Craig's home state.

"There aren’t any really new allegations or new revelations but in this case it's coming from the senator's colleagues on Capitol Hill so it will be interesting to see how much weight Idahoans attach to that," Richert said.

The panel also said Craig should have received permission from the ethics panel before using campaign funds to pay his legal bills. Craig, who is not running for re-election, has spent more than $213,000 in campaign money for legal expense and public relations work in the wake of his arrest and conviction last summer.

The committee said it had reached no conclusion about whether use of campaign funds was proper, but it said "it is clear that you never sought the committee's approval, as required," to use the money for legal expenses.

Any future use of campaign money for legal bills will be seen as "demonstrating your continuing disregard of ethics requirements," the ethics committee wrote in its three-page letter.

The panel also admonished Craig for showing the arresting officer a business card that identified him as a U.S. senator. Craig has been reported to have told the officer at the time, "What do you think about that?"

The committee wrote, "You knew or should have known that a reasonable person in the position of the arresting officer could view your action and statement as an improper attempt by you to use your position and status ... to receive special and favorable treatment."

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., chairwoman of the ethics panel, declined to comment. A spokeswoman said the panel's letter of admonition cannot be appealed.

The ethics panel took no further action against Craig.

Craig, a three-term Republican, pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct in August after he was accused of soliciting sex in a bathroom at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport in June.

After the matter became public, Craig tried to withdraw his plea. A judge in Minnesota refused, saying Craig's plea "was accurate, voluntary and intelligent, and ... supported by the evidence." Craig has appealed that ruling to the Minnesota Court of Appeals.

Senate Republicans demanded the ethics investigation after news broke of Craig's conviction last August. Craig first promised to resign Sept. 30, then reversed his decision. He now says he will stay in office until his term expires in January.

Craig has said an undercover police officer misinterpreted his foot and hand movements as signals that he wanted sex.

Craig, who lost several GOP leadership positions on Senate committees and subcommittees in the wake of the scandal, has been working with Boxer and other members of the Senate's environment committee on a global warming bill and other matters.

Besides Boxer, the letter is signed by Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, the panel's vice chairman, and Sens. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., Ken Salazar, D-Colo., Pat Roberts, R-Kan., and Johnny Isakson, R-Ga.

[tsr13]

How do you plead guilty, then say "Just kidding"? Someone made a comment about Craig spending over $200,000 on legal fee''s. That''s our government. I''ve got an idea, lets just move him to another government job like they do priest after molesting children. Got into an arguement once about politics and religion. I think those two words together pretty much clash.

[tsr13]

How do you plead guilty, then say "Just kidding"? Someone made a comment about Craig spending over $200,000 on legal fee''s. That''s our government. I''ve got an idea, lets just move him to another government job like they do priest after molesting children. Got into an arguement once about politics and religion. I think those two words together pretty much clash.

[b-easy63]

To blindly have some kind of evil allegiance to an "administration" so corrupt and pathetic as this one is just sick.

Posted by stevex47 at 08:52 PM : Feb 13, 2008

No different than those with blind loyalty to Clinton or Hilary for Obama for that matter.

Blind loyalty is never good nor is disregarding evidence that your guy or gal is bad news.

Americans act like spoiled, not too bright children, in need of a fairy tale--replete with a god or goddess to save them--or at the very least a savior or King to worship. Pathetic. And to have either--they will lie and defend anything their leader does. It works the same for Democrats as it does for Republicans--witness the excuses for some of the stuff known about the candidates--and their followers reactions.

[deemsnyd]

Posted by parrot2 at 12:38 PM : Feb 14, 2008


That''s what the public has been informed of. Do you actually think that democrats aren''t running around doing all kinds of morally reprehensible things? How do we know what has been done that has not come to light? Could it possible have something to do with, oh, I don''t know, the LIBERAL media? I''m just sayin'' that we only know what we are told by the news and we all know how that goes. I''m not saying that they are making this stuff up, I''m just saying that I doubt the democrats are morally superior-they just ain''t gettin'' caught. If anything, we''ll say they''re smarter, not morally superior. Cheers! Whatever that means.

[deemsnyd]

I don''t get it. Why does morality vs immorality have anything to do with a person''s political affilation? Aren''t there immoral democrats and immoral republicans? Aren''t there moral democrats and moral republicans? I think it is sad that everyone jumps on the GOP because Craig is republican and everyone jumps on the democrats because Clinton was a democrat. Both men were wrong. Both men committed sexual acts they shouldn''t have. Why does it matter which political party they belong to? I know, I know...the republicans don''t vote for gay marriage and are typically pro family values, so that makes Craig a hypocrit, but Clinton always said he was pro family values and didn''t have much respect for his family or whether or not they stayed in tact. If we are going to critisize them for their behavior, let it be because of the behavior itself, not because of their political views...oh, and only if we have never comitted any sexual sins ourselves.

[deemsnyd]

LOL Do you honestly believe your attempt to divert attention from what Craig did and what the party of "Family Values" are truly all about will work? I seriously doubt it! LOL We have a leader of a Political Party here, in a public bathroom doing MUCH worse than things he condemned other American''''s for doing on the floor of the senate. If you can''''t understand the difference here, you are completely blinded and without hope.

Posted by skyk at 08:31 PM : Feb 13, 2008



OMG! What''s been done on the floor of the senate? Did they do it in front of everyone??

[inventagod]

It''s called ETHICS, Mr. Craig...

tap tap wink wink

[l8c6]

I wonder how all his republican Idahoan supporters feel knowing the funds they sent to the Craig campaign were used to bail him out of legal costs prior to him bailing out of another run for the senate.

[abp100100]

PLEASE DON''T COME OUT. *** ALREADY HAVE A BAD ENOUGH IMAGE WITH THE GENERAL PUBLIC THAT THEY DON''T NEED AN A**HOLE LIKE YOU COMING OUT. GO BACK TO IDAHO AND FIND A SHEEP.

[l8c6]

Imagine a "liberal" democrat involved in such scandal most notably at the end of the 90''s. The neo cons would have not let the public rest one day without a daily update, nor would the, tsk, tsk, "liberal media".