Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington - Larry Craig

BREAKING, but not surprising: Senate Ethics Committee dismissed Ethics Complaint against Senator Vitter

crew — Thu, 8 May 2008 16:23:18 -0500

The Senate Ethics Committee did what it does best today -- NOTHING. Today, CREW received a response to the ethics complaint we filed against Senator Vitter last year. It was dismissed "without prejudice." We'll have a statement shortly. In the meantime, here's the letter:

Senator Larry Craig offers advice and support to Senator David Vitter

crew — Wed, 9 Apr 2008 09:42:17 -0500

CREW has repeatedly expressed concern about the disparate treatment between the criminal scandals involving Senator Larry Craig and Senator David Vitter. Craig was the subject of an admonishment from the Senate Ethics Committee while no such action has been taken against Vitter.

This week, as Vitter awaits the news of whether he'll be a witness in the D.C. Madam's trial, Senator Craig had some words of wisdom and support for his colleague:

Embattled Louisiana Sen. David Vitter (R) is getting support from fellow Republicans who say he should not resign over a public sex scandal — including from someone who can speak from experience.

Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho was among several GOP senators who say Vitter’s testimony in the “D.C. Madam” prostitution case should not compel his resignation.

“First and foremost, in these kinds of issues, it’s the state and the relationship you have with your state that really determines where you ought to go,” Craig said. “That was certainly my case. The Senate itself wasn’t going to judge me. I would allow the citizens of my state to do so. And there is still strong support there."

Craig went through his own trial-by-media last year, after his arrest for and guilty plea to soliciting sex from an undercover male officer in a Minneapolis airport.

Senator Craig officially not running for re-election

crew — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 14:58:28 -0500

Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) is going to retire after his term expires according to The Hill. CREW filed an ethics complaint against Senator Craig last August after it was revealed he had pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges in Minnesota. The Senate Ethics Committee admonished Craig last month:

Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho), encumbered by a scandal since last summer, did not file for reelection by his state’s deadline Friday, keeping a promise he made and officially marking the end of his congressional career.

Craig’s political future has been in doubt since his arrest and guilty plea on disorderly conduct charges filed after an incident in a men’s restroom at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport last June.

Larry Craig also criticized not asking Senate Ethics Committte to allow use of campaign funds to pay legal fees

crew — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 13:34:56 -0600

We've seen many Senators, most recently Pete Domenici, attempt to use campaign funds to pay legal fees. But, they ask if it's okay. Larry Craig didn't bother to ask:

The Ethics Committee on Wednesday admonished Craig for his actions and chastised him for failing to seek permission before he used campaign money for his legal defense — more than $213,000 so far.

“You should also take careful note that the committee will consider any further use of your campaign funds for legal expenses without the committee’s approval to be conduct demonstrating your continuing disregard of ethics requirements,” the six-member panel wrote.

Craig brushed off a question about whether he will seek the committee’s permission. “That’s already been written about,” he said.

Hypocrisy reigns as Senate Ethics Committee admonishes Sen. Craig, but not Sen. Vitter

crew — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:03:02 -0600

Melanie Sloan released the following statement on the Senate Ethics Committee admonishment of Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) yesterday:

The Senate Ethics Committee found that Larry Craig acted improperly, which of course, was readily apparent. Although a sign that the Ethics Committee is not completely moribund, one has to wonder why only Senator Craig’s conduct merited action. For example, the committee has not taken up the case of Senator David Vitter, who admitted to the crime of soliciting for prostitution and against whom CREW filed a complaint a month before the Craig complaint. Neither has the committee acted on CREW’s March 2007 complaint against Senator Pete Domenici for improperly pressuring a U.S. Attorney. Finally, it took over two years for the committee to dismiss CREW’s 2005 complaint against former Senator Bill Frist on the grounds the committee no longer had jurisdiction over the retired senator. Hypocrisy reigns.

Hypocrisy still reigns.

Larry Craig: "disappointed and strongly disagree" with Ethics Committee

crew — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 07:35:29 -0600

As reported last night, the Senate Ethics Committee admonished Senator Larry Craig. More details of the Ethics Committee's letter to Craig have begun to emerge -- and Craig has responded:

The public letter of admonition signed by all six panel members also criticized Craig for attempting to withdraw his guilty plea. They said Craig seemed to be calculating that by pleading guilty, he would avoid public disclosure and adverse public reaction to his arrest.

The panel said it had decided to resolve the matter through the public admonishment so that, “on behalf of the United States Senate, it may make known clearly that the conduct to which you pled guilty, together with the related and subsequent conduct discussed in this letter, is improper conduct which has reflected discreditably on the Senate."

Craig reacted to the decision by stating that he would stay in office.

“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,” Craig said in a statement. “I will continue to serve the people of Idaho.”

AP: "Ethics Committee Admonishes Craig"

crew — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:56:00 -0600

AP has the initial report:

The Senate Ethics Committee says Idaho Sen. Larry Craig acted improperly in a men's room sex sting.

In a letter Wednesday, the ethics panel says Craig's attempt to withdraw his guilty plea in a June arrest at a Minneapolis airport was an effort to evade legal consequences of his own actions.

The letter says Craig's actions brought discredit on the Senate.

More as details unfold.

Senator Craig files appeal to have guilty plea withdrawn

crew — Thu, 10 Jan 2008 10:14:00 -0600

The Crypt at the Politico reports that Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) has filed an appeal with the courts in Minnesota in his quest to have his guilty plea withdrawn. This all stems from Craig's arrest last June in the Minneapolis airport. CREW filed an ethics complaint against Craig and Senate's Republican leadership asked for an ethics investigation as well. As you can see here and here, we have continually noted the double standard shown by GOP Senators who expressed outrage over Craig's behavior when they gave a standing ovation to Senator David Vitter (R-LA) who had engaged the services of a prostitute:

Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) is once again fighting to withdraw his guilty plea in an airport sex sting, filing an appeals brief on Tuesday arguing that his actions were not criminal.

“There is an insufficient factual basis to support the finding that he is guilty of violating any laws,” said Craig's lawyer, Billy Martin.

The filing is an appeal to an October ruling in Minnesota, rejecting Craig’s first attempt to have the guilty plea withdrawn.

Craig was arrested by an undercover police officer at the Minneapolis airport on June 11 as part of a broader investigation into men soliciting sex in airport restrooms. According to the officer who made the arrest, Craig tapped his feet (in the now infamous “wide stance”) and swiped his hand along a stall divider in a suggestive manner.

In the brief, Craig’s legal team argues that the senator’s actions were not criminal because Minnesota’s disorderly conduct law requires that conduct alarm or anger “others,” while Craig’s actions only affected a single individual — the officer who made the arrest.

Joe Conason on "The Senate's Strange Double Standard" -- Larry Craig v. Ted Stevens

crew — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:07:02 -0500

A Senate ethics investigation awaits Larry Craig, but there is no similar outrage over the alleged corruption of Ted Stevens (or David Vitter, for that matter). Joe Conason examines the double standard:

For an object lesson in the distorted values of the United States Senate, consider how that august institution is handling the ethical embarrassments created by Republican

As everyone in America knows by now, Craig pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge for an indiscretion in an airport men's room. Stevens, along with his son Ben and a number of other Alaska politicians and businessmen, is the subject of a corruption investigation that resulted in an FBI raid on his home last summer. Every day, the pressure mounts on Craig from his colleagues to resign — and every day, those same colleagues treat Stevens as if he remains above suspicion.

The Craig case is currently under investigation by the Senate Ethics Committee, yet no such probe of the Stevens matter has commenced. According to the prevailing morality in the Senate, a legislator who may or may not have signaled his prurient interest in another man demands the most searching scrutiny, but a legislator who quite plainly accepted financial favors from a contractor deserves none.

Senator Craig is appealing decision that uphold his guilty plea

crew — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 15:26:44 -0500

The Senate Ethics Committee isn't the only proceeding affecting Senator Larry Craig after all. Today, Craig appealed the decision of the Minnesota judge who upheld his guilty plea:

In court papers filed Monday, Craig asked an appeals court in Hennepin County, Minn., to reverse a judge’s decision earlier this month to let stand Craig’s August guilty plea. It was made following his arrest for allegedly soliciting sex from an undercover police officer at a Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport restroom.

The court filing, coupled with Craig’s launch of a public relations offensive to clear his name, are the latest signs that Republicans will have a tough time moving away from the scandal.