Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Remember Senator Larry "Wide Stance" Craig?
In 2007, this hypocritical idiot PLED GUILTY TO A CRIME, then announced he was resigning from the Senate, and then didn't resign.
Perhaps we can convince Senator Franken and Representative Conyers to do the same: stand-down for re-election, but keep the seat until then?
What's good for the GOPee'ers is certainly good for the Democrats, isn't it? Sen. Wide Stance Craig (R) himself sets a recent precedent...
Resignation announcement/reversal, and motion to withdraw plea
At a news conference on September 1, 2007, Craig announced his intent to resign, "with sadness and deep regret", effective September 30, 2007. On September 4, 2007, a spokesperson for Craig indicated that he was reconsidering his decision to resign, if his conviction was rapidly overturned and his committee assignments were restored.
On September 10, 2007, Craig's attorneys filed a motion to withdraw his guilty plea, arguing that it "was not knowing and intelligent and therefore was in violation of his constitutional rights." His lawyers further argued that Craig "felt compelled to grasp the lifeline," hoping that if he were to submit to an interview and plead guilty that none of the allegations would be made public. The motion argued that Craig had entered the plea under stress caused by media inquiries into his sexuality. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed an amicus curiae brief stating that the secret sting operation used by the police was not "carefully crafted" to avoid ensnaring innocent speech and that "the defendant should be permitted to withdraw his plea, and, should the state recharge him, to contest the constitutional validity of any prosecution."
Craig's motion hearing to withdraw his guilty plea was held on September 26, 2007, before Judge Charles A. Porter, Jr. Craig’s Washington D.C. attorney, William Martin, argued that Craig’s actions could not be considered disorderly conduct because "you should have either touching, or words, or a combination of the two." The other main argument was made by Craig’s Minneapolis attorney, Thomas Kelly, who argued that the mail-in petition used by Craig was "defective" because it lacked a judge’s signature.[40] On September 26, 2007, Craig released a statement that he would remain in office until the Hennepin County District Court judge ruled on his motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
On October 4, 2007, Porter denied Craig's motion to withdraw his guilty plea, ruling that Craig's plea was accurate, voluntary, and intelligent, and that evidence supported the conviction. As part of Craig's appeal of this ruling, the ACLU filed a brief that cited a Minnesota Supreme Court ruling from 38 years earlier finding that those engaging in sexual encounters in closed stalls in otherwise public restrooms "have a reasonable expectation of privacy," a finding that the ACLU argued would contradict the state's claim that Craig was inviting the undercover officer to have sex "in public."
After Judge Porter's ruling, Craig announced that despite his pledge to the contrary, he would serve out his Senate term. He stated that he intended to "continue my effort to clear my name in the Senate Ethics Committee—something that is not possible if I am not serving in the Senate." Craig did not run for re-election in 2008 and left office on January 3, 2009. He was succeeded by Republican Jim Risch, the Lieutenant Governor of Idaho.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Craig_scandal
At a news conference on September 1, 2007, Craig announced his intent to resign, "with sadness and deep regret", effective September 30, 2007. On September 4, 2007, a spokesperson for Craig indicated that he was reconsidering his decision to resign, if his conviction was rapidly overturned and his committee assignments were restored.
On September 10, 2007, Craig's attorneys filed a motion to withdraw his guilty plea, arguing that it "was not knowing and intelligent and therefore was in violation of his constitutional rights." His lawyers further argued that Craig "felt compelled to grasp the lifeline," hoping that if he were to submit to an interview and plead guilty that none of the allegations would be made public. The motion argued that Craig had entered the plea under stress caused by media inquiries into his sexuality. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed an amicus curiae brief stating that the secret sting operation used by the police was not "carefully crafted" to avoid ensnaring innocent speech and that "the defendant should be permitted to withdraw his plea, and, should the state recharge him, to contest the constitutional validity of any prosecution."
Craig's motion hearing to withdraw his guilty plea was held on September 26, 2007, before Judge Charles A. Porter, Jr. Craig’s Washington D.C. attorney, William Martin, argued that Craig’s actions could not be considered disorderly conduct because "you should have either touching, or words, or a combination of the two." The other main argument was made by Craig’s Minneapolis attorney, Thomas Kelly, who argued that the mail-in petition used by Craig was "defective" because it lacked a judge’s signature.[40] On September 26, 2007, Craig released a statement that he would remain in office until the Hennepin County District Court judge ruled on his motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
On October 4, 2007, Porter denied Craig's motion to withdraw his guilty plea, ruling that Craig's plea was accurate, voluntary, and intelligent, and that evidence supported the conviction. As part of Craig's appeal of this ruling, the ACLU filed a brief that cited a Minnesota Supreme Court ruling from 38 years earlier finding that those engaging in sexual encounters in closed stalls in otherwise public restrooms "have a reasonable expectation of privacy," a finding that the ACLU argued would contradict the state's claim that Craig was inviting the undercover officer to have sex "in public."
After Judge Porter's ruling, Craig announced that despite his pledge to the contrary, he would serve out his Senate term. He stated that he intended to "continue my effort to clear my name in the Senate Ethics Committee—something that is not possible if I am not serving in the Senate." Craig did not run for re-election in 2008 and left office on January 3, 2009. He was succeeded by Republican Jim Risch, the Lieutenant Governor of Idaho.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Craig_scandal
7 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
= new reply since forum marked as read
This is like saying something isn't wrong once someone else has already done it once. 
Fly in the face of reason!
Link to tweet
Intellectual dishonesty is the advocacy of a position known to be false. An argument which is misused to advance an agenda or to reinforce one's deeply held beliefs in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Mugambi Nandi?
