Sen. Craig Reconsiders Choice to Resign

AP (via Verizon online) ^ | 09/04/2007 20:00:31 EST | By JOHN MILLER

[kinoxi]

You really think this is an elaborate four decade long smear campaign on this guy? That numerous allegations culminated in an LEO framing him? The ruse then forced him to plead guilty, go on television and resign. Most of the conspiracy/fantasy sites I could link you to would probably be construed as offensive...

[muawiyah]

Just listen to his negotiations on the tape. Hear what Larry says. Listen closely to what the officer said. Ignore the written police report for a moment.

Larry seemed to be right in his element. Now to find out about his OTHER arrests in OTHER toilets ~ they certainly exist.

[MEGoody]

If he’s cleared of all charges, I don’t see why he should resign. Just my 2 cents.

[muawiyah]

Jealousy? Of what? STDs?

Time to get your head out of the stalls.

[kinoxi]

He’s already been found guilty, because he admitted guilt. He pled (pleaded) guilty to the lesser charge in order to have the privacy related charge (staring into the stall) dropped. How can he be cleared? If he wants it retried the other charge, and possibly more will be brought up.

[MEGoody]

He’s already been found guilty, because he admitted guilt.

Yes, and he changed his plea, claiming that the police convinced him to plead guilty to make this 'go away'. I heard the tape and can see how someone could easily have been swayed into pleading guilty.

How can he be cleared?

He tried to change his plea. Not sure if the judge accepted it or not. . .haven't been following this story that closely. If the judge refused to accept it, then he can't be cleared of that charge. But frankly, I wouldn't be inclined to hold that against him in that case. (Of course, he isn't my senator, so that's rather meaningless.)

If he wants it retried the other charge, and possibly more will be brought up.

Possibly. . .but if the police/prosecutor threaten to bring up other charges if he withdraws his guilty plea, I would consider that a less than ethical action.

[elpadre]

please note: he was a witness against himself.

under the duress of the moment?? Hardly, it was months after the bust.

who do you believe? The Craig then, or the Craig now??

[elpadre]

Craig cast the stone, it is the ripples with which we are dealing now.

[Petronski]

But now push has come to shove, and he says he's innocent, they have to prove him guilty.

Uh, no. He pleaded guilty. The state has nothing to prove. He is guilty.

[writmeister]

Bringing back other charges would not be unethical.

When Senator Craig entered his plea agreement, he agreed to plead guilty to disorderly conduct in exchange for the State dropping the other charges. If Senator Craig prevails on his quest to renege the agreement and withdraw the guilty plea, then he will be placed back in the same position where he was before he entered his plea: facing several different charges.

Senator Craig thought the plea deal was the easy way out and now does not want to accept the consequences of his actions.

[duckln]

Back to the top. Keeps the topic more active on the forum’s
screen.

[kinoxi]

haven't been following this story that closely

Got it.

[JasonC]

Um, Republicans win in Idaho by 30-40% of the vote routinely, and have forever. Winning four terms there is exactly equivalent to being nominated there in 1992, because Republicans never lose the seat, and incumbents practically never lose primaries. If Craig leaves, we can pick from 400,000 other loyal Idaho Republicans. You can't tell me there isn't an intelligent non-felon among them. There isn't a safer seat; a dead Republican would beat George Clooney.

[AuH2ORepublican]

“A telephone call Craig received last week from Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., urging him to consider fighting for his seat is affecting Craig’s decision to reconsider his resignation, Smith said.”

---

Man, talk about the gift that keeps on giving. Specter can’t seem to go more than a couple of months without stabbing the GOP in the back. And to think we were within 1% of defeating him in the 2004 primary . . . .

[Cyropaedia]

No one advised the Senator to do anything. Craig never sought the advice of lawyers prior to pleading guilty! He had plenty of time to do so. That is why the imbecile is now trying to come back with a team of lawyers and get his guilty plea reversed. The idiot now realizes his big mistake.

Hell yes a team of quality attorneys stood a chance of getting the charges dropped without going to trial. From a legal standpoint the charges were flimsy. They could have called the D.A. and argued that it simply wasn't worth the time and money to prosecute this case under any circumstance. What real evidence did they have...? Just word of a cop in a bathroom stall. No other witnesses. No camera footage. No words were exchanged. Nada.

Craig had a golden opportunity to get this case dropped and he wasted it. It was the biggest mistake of his entire life.

[no dems]

The Craig then.