Posted on 09/04/2007 7:48:46 PM PDT by RightOnTheLeftCoast
Ben Stein: Gestapo Tactics Got Larry Craig
Tuesday, September 4, 2007 7:39 PM
Former Sen. Larry Craig didn't do anything illegal and was railroaded with "Gestapo tactics," says actor and commentator Ben Stein.
Appearing recently on Your World With Neil Cavuto program, Stein remarked: "I don't like the idea that people are sitting in the next stall from you at a public bathroom listening to whether or not you tap your foot. This is, as I said, Gestapo tactics. Gestapo, Gestapo, Gestapo. It's not America."
Stein says Craig, who was arrested June 11 by Minneapolis police and pled guilty to a charge of disorderly conduct, is a victim of "pure police entrapment and thuggery."
"The police have real work to do at the airport," Stein says. "It's an airport, hello. There are security problems at airports. Al-qaida: Are you listening? Our security people are entrapping perfectly honest U.S. senators in lavatory stalls instead of looking for you terrorists."
Stein charges that police intimidated Craig into pleading guilty to disorderly conduct after he was arrested for tapping his foot in a bathroom stall at the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport.
Police say foot tapping is a common overture used to signal interest in a sexual encounter. Minneapolis police had reportedly made several arrests in recent months for lewd conduct in restrooms at the airport.
"A policeman drags him off, or verbally drags him off, starts browbeating him, essentially threatens he's going to ruin his career if the guy doesn't plead guilty right away," Stein tells Cavuto. "This is Gestapo tactics in Minneapolis-St. Paul. It's not nice."
Stein adds that it was wrong for GOP stalwarts to join the drumbeat for Craig's resignation: "This is some way to treat the people who have been loyal members of your party for many years. What did he do wrong? Suppose he was soliciting for gay sex. Gay sex is not illegal in the United States, the Supreme Court has said that. If it were illegal, it would be a different story. It's not illegal. He didn't do anything illegal, they're just bludgeoning him into a confession."
The Craig scandal points out a fundamental question about the balance of political power, according to Stein.
"On trumped up charges, they bring down the legislator and change the balance of power within the United States generally," he says. "This is a really serious case of police overreaching and the victim here is Larry Craig and the Constitution of the United States."
Craig has represented Idaho in Congress for over a quarter of a century and was up for re-election next year.
That's what I have been saying on Craig threads all last week, but people keep telling me I'm wrong. If homosexual sex isn't illegal anymore, how can it be illegal for a man to proposition another man?
Sure, giving the homo a knuckle sandwich might be satisfying and appropriate, but it would certainly get you jailed. But an arrest of a homo for propositioning another man seems to me to violate our liberal courts' attitude toward the extraordinary "rights" of homosexuals, and society's newfound approval of their disgusting perversions. I certainly don't want any creepy old homo trying to hook up with me in a public restroom, but I would be very surprised if he was arrested because a nobody like me reported him to the Minneapolis cops. Fifteen years ago I would have expected the pervert to be arrested, but not in today's brave new world where homosexuality is seen as a respectable and normal lifestyle.
The more I read about he incident the more suspicious I become about the motives of the Minneapolis cop. MN is a liberal state overall, and Minneapolis is very liberal. It probably wouldn't be too awfully hard for a Democrat dirty tricks operative to find an undercover Minneapolis cop who would be willing to cooperate in bringing down a powerful Republican Senator who has been accused of homosexuality in the past as Craig has been.
I'm not claiming that Craig didn't do what he is reported to have done, but IMHO it's at least possible that he was set up by a cop who knew about that particular restroom's reputation as a homo pick-up spot and made sure that he was there in that restroom when Craig came in. I don't think Craig could have been convicted of a crime if he had hired a lawyer and fought the charge. I mean what crime did he commit under the relatively new legal standing of homosexual behavior that has been created by liberal judges and Justices? Hitting on a woman in an airport bar with the usual eye contact and suggestive flirtatious approach without any physical contact would not have gotten him arrested, so given our liberal courts' insistence on equal or better rights for homos why was Craig arrested for hitting on another man? I still think something about all this doesn't smell right, and it's not the typical stench of a busy airport restroom that I smell.
all the more reason to dump this Foley risk from our ranks.
Actually he was said to have “peered into the stall” over a period of two minutes. Like if you were waiting for a stall. As for the foot, Craig seemed that it was an innocuous intrusion. As for the hand, even the cop was confused which hand was used. Lying? Cops can’t lie. That would be...uh, unethical.
I really think this line of argument that children might have been there is a stretch. Parents who let their children wander around airports alone should be prosecuted for neglect. Let’s put the DCF in there to do stings, too.
I am going to puke if I hear one more apologist defend Larry Craig.
Let me get this straight...
Ben Stein and all other idiotic apologists want me to believe that a United States Senator, a person with ambition, drive, money, determination and political savvy, gets railroaded on a false charge and PLEADS GUILTLY, DOESN’T CALL HIS LAWYER AND FIGHT THE FALSE CHARGE.
Give me a break!
I am Joe Nobody, and if some cop cuffed me for homosexual solicitation, I would be screaming bloody murder. I would be screaming, “Just try to prove that I have ever done anything even remotely interpreted as a homosexual act or innuendo!”. I would be spitting blood, holding news conferences, calling for a full investigation of police corruption, etc.
This reminds me of OJ murdering his wife. He claimed he was innocent but there were no tears, no outrage, no “I want her killers head on a platter!” Nothing.
Craig is guilty as hell and all apologists are delusional. Aren’t most Senators also lawyers? Aenators are among the most influential, ambitious, egotistical, power hungry, confrontational people you are going to find on the planet, and all you apologists want me to believe that a person like that would plead guilty to a COMPLETELY FALSE ACCUSATION RUINING THEIR REPUTATION AND BESMIRCHING THEM A HOMOSEXUAL when they are innocent and are not a homosexual.
Please. He is guilty as hell. Don’t be a schmuck. Senators DON’T plead guilty when they aren’t.
Well, how about the notorious Kennedy-Dodd waitress sandwich exposition? Not just proposition or foot taping, but wanton, perverse, sexual activity in public. How come after 20 years these turds are still basking in the senate? Where were the cops?
BTW, why do you think you don’t have ambition, drive, money, determination and political savviness?
Thugs in uniform!
Pee Wee Herman was the first man to masturbate in the wrong place! To the gallows! (What a mind boggling joke!)
A lot depends on what the officer’s responses were - he could have been inviting the continuance of the contact, as he would have been if trying to snare a catch. What do you suppose the officer was doing?
You have two choices. Cuba or North Korea, as you can’t seem to love the constitution of the US.
EW..EEEEWWWW - You know, I really REALLY don’t want to know all this stuff about gay signals. I don’t care WHO it is doing the sending or receiving! I have no probelms with whatever people want to do in the privacy of their own homes as long as it is consensual. But please, PLEASE!!!! Have respect for others who are not of the same persuasion and just keep it private! And keep our public places safe for children!
What an individual does it what that individual does. It should not reflect on the party in any way shape or form.
Here is the schizophrenic behavior I see. The same people who scream up and down about personal privacy and govt. have no problem surrendering their personal privacy and the privacy of others to degenerates and other strangers.
How do you square it? So, it’s okay for people to invade your privacy as long as it’s in a restroom? It’s okay for people to put their heads and every other body part up under the door and stall wall, along with video cameras and anything else they feel like using? You can’t do anything about it because they were trolling for sex and everybody knows that for sodomites it’s activity protected by the Supreme Court?
Fortunately grown ups know better. There is no justification for the things Craig has pleaded to. The only way any argument continues is by ignoring the facts of the case.
We are talking about a bathroom not a bar. There are sodomite bars and no one is talking about placing cops in them. No one has to undress to use the bar. Public bathrooms should not be places where your privacy is invaded.
Sodomites should not be allowed to troll bathrooms, men should not be allowed to troll ladies’ rooms. People should be free to do their business in peace. If the sodomites want to pick up dates they should go to bars just like everyone else. No one is stopping them.
The only thing funny about this is how people have to stand opposed to themselves to support this behavior.
Why should parents even have to think about worrying about this. The restroom is a public restroom after all. It was made for them and anyone else who needs to use the facilities as they were designed. They were not made for trolling.
Should the mothers go into the men’s room so their sons will be protected? Should they have to bring their ten year olds into the ladies’ room because one group of people doesn’t know how to act in a public bathroom? What about twelve year olds and older. Pederast’s dream, parent’s nightmare?
Why must this group be given special privileges? The restrooms were never even made for what they want to do. So the people using it properly should be punished while the people using it improperly should be celebrated? Is there some strange water people are drinking making them think this way?
No - I hadn’t seen this - but I remember how the police treated the pro-lifers when they did the Rescue demonstrations in the 90’s. The police did intimidate people into signing confessions I heard. That is why I have some doubts about all this.
I heard the tape last night of the “interrogation” of Craig by the officer. The officer was pretty rough and belligerent and didn’t let Craig finish his answers.
The question I have though is why did Craig sign the guilty confession so much later if he had time to consider the consequences of signing the confession?
What we have to worry about now is that Craig is considering now NOT stepping down - and you know how the dimms will use this for all they can against the Pubbs! Rotten bums!
Duncan Hunter - Conservative/Looking out for Americans!
http://www.ontheissues.org/Duncan_Hunter.htm
That’s how understood it too! I don’t know if Sen. Craig is innocent or guilty - but - I have trouble with the way this whole interrogation went!
Duncan Hunter - Conservative/Looking out for Americans!
http://www.ontheissues.org/Duncan_Hunter.htm
Sodomy was also on the books of most if not all states. These laws were hardly enforced as well. Should the federal government have enforced them also? Maybe you’d like to see an FBI satellite office in every airport bathroom around the nation too? The federal government’s expansion of the interstate commerce clause has led to the loss of more freedom than you will ever know.
How about Pedophile rings-are we suppose to let them operate between states?
If the law is on the books, it should either be enforced or removed.
If they States cannot handle protecting the citizens, then the Federal government needs to step in.
And as for the Federal government and the interstate commerce clause, that is due to the Supreme Court stretching the meaning of the Constitution and has nothing to do with legitimate law enforcement.
Then he shouldn't be a U.S. Senator!
Is that too hard to grasp, that a Senator should be honest as well as moral?
So, if he didn't have anything to hide he should have not pled guilty, if he did, he should resign and not continue to embarass the State he was elected to represent.
Still, Craig could do the Repubs a greater service by now switching to the Dem Party.
If he fights or resigns, it hurts the Repub Party, as Craig is soiled goods.
If he merely becomes a Dem, then the Dems are tainted by Craig’s soiled goods reputation.
Plus at least the Dem Party will now have one pro-2nd Amend member now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.