Disgraced Republican Senator Larry Craig Will Try To Take Back Guilty Plea
Via NPR:
Sen. Larry Craig should be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea in a sex sting because he was under extreme stress after being hounded by journalists asking questions about his sexuality, his lawyer argues.
Craig, an Idaho Republican, pleaded guilty in August to disorderly conduct following a sting operation in a men's bathroom at the Minneapolis airport. His lawyer, William Martin, said he will file court documents Monday trying to undo that decision so Craig can fight the charge.
Martin said Monday that Craig did not "knowingly and intelligently enter a guilty plea." The senator simply admitted conduct that "itself does not constitute a crime," Martin said. Read more...
Senator Craig's motion to withdraw his guilty plea has been posted online, you can read it here.
He wants to show Murdochs Wall Street Journal he's tough.
Isn't Senator Craig a lawyer himself?
Maybe he can get favorable treatment from the judge by providing him a blow job...
I am tough, tough in leather...preferably assless chaps.
But thats not a crime! I am only guilty of having a wide stance, which you are within.
God Bless the stall.
"No Do-Overs"
what does he think he's playing at here?
Just GO AWAY already.
Maybe the best gift Dems get this election cycle.As for the blow job may we hope for a female judge and D.A.
What is this, tiddly winks? There aren't any take backs...
Takeback Mountain
If he can't stand up to the media, how will he stand up to Al Qaeda?
The Harder they come, the harder they fall one and all.
I was going to take some time To address the failure of local religious and otherwise leaders to put a sizable dent in a problem that has ballooned to monstrous proportions recently. Undoubtedly you’ve probably caught the faint sulfur dioxide olfactory aura of this pressing problem whilst engaged in fighting off sleep in the midst of the latest television assault on our collective senses – the evening “news”. Yes the city fathers and the archbishop have gotten the panties in a twist over a plague that threatens the very loose and thin fabric which barely contains the dregs of civilized discourse and real stopping power. And it’s getting worse. Recently a well renowned Republican figure was forced to confront his own frailty of human nature, as he was forced by public pressure to directly atone for his grave and disgusting social faux pax.
From the New York Times, August 19th: “Although you’re probably still a-buzz after the successful passing of legislation I sponsored requiring mandatory ass-gaskets for all public facilities, my accomplishment is, I suspect, somewhat blemished by troubling thoughts and barely audible curses spat in my general direction, the result of a possible qualm I no doubt supplanted in the minds of my constituents with concrete affect concerning events of a delicate nature that occurred the other day whilst on a short break from the rigors and late summer heat of D.C.. I feel an apology is owed or at least a feasible clarification is appropriate, as well as a rapid rapprochement in case feelings were damaged or one’s sense of decency and the parameters of good taste were breached beyond repair. For the record and in front of all that is holy and righteous, what I mean to suggest in the spirit of humor was not meant in any way to imply that I consider the use of my local municipal public swimming pool as my personal urinal or bed pan. Nor should it be misunderstood by implication that municipal swimming pools also often contains a deodorizing urinal cake (strawberry scented, no less) contained within a plastic mesh guard container, designed to prevent solid objects such as cigarette butts, small photographs of George Bush or Dick Cheney, Juicyfruit gum, or various grades of used paper from being flushed and possibly causing a plumbing stoppage. As much of a gargantuan misinterpretation as this could possibly be taken, it does not take very much imagination to deduce that a reasonable person of average intelligence could extrapolate this false impression to a ridiculous heights of absurdity where they would consider any public recreation facility a small building or other structure, in which such toilets are contained for medical purposes, or to use where access to washroom facilities are not possible, such as in small aircraft or some of the more popular low-end massage parlors. Please humbly accept my act of contrition in case the aforementioned misapprehension in fact has come to mind, and let me know if there’s anything I can do to clear the air of this malfeasance. And for the record, I use the proper facilities, and no, I don’t urinate on toilet seats or in the milk cartons. Oddly enough, some radical feminists, or otherwise persons not possessing a penis, have condemned the practice of men standing to urinate as sexist and politically incorrect, not to mention the fact that they always miss no matter what they say to the contrary. Some universities in Germany have removed urinals after protests by feminists and pencil-dick Rockabilly homosexuals. In Germany, toilet ghosts have been sold for public places and homes because standing while urinating is now viewed by many as too sexist. If a man raises the seat of a regular toilet to urinate, the “toilet ghost” , in a voice that imitates former German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, enunciates the phrase ‘Hey, stand peeing is not allowed here and you will be punished with fines, so if you don’t want any trouble, you’d best sit down’. But I digress. I do not pee in pools
This is beyond the beyond. What kind of world do these people line in???
OT: Tweety, on Hardball, just proclaimed that the Iraq war "was a waste of blood." Ya think the right will call him out on that?
There are three Senators standing on a street corner, each of them wearing a potato sack. How can you call which one is a prostitute?
... wait for it ...
Because the label on his/her potato sack says "Idaho".
Bah-DUM-bump...tsshhh!
(You can quote me.) (:>
gallery Says:
Just GO AWAY already.
==========
I'm in your bathroom right now gallery...now git'on in here!
who cares...he's toast.
Your Honor, I'd like to withdraw my plea because I was overly concerned about the consequences of my actions.
Ya, that's going to fly.
His only hope is if the judge is a partisan right-wing hack, and if he is, is he likely to help out a homosexual?
On the other hand, it wouldn't be all bad for a Dem to run against Craig next time around, eh?
theWalrus @ 12:
A sheltered world that has permitted them to hide behind the cloak of Importance, Authority, and National Security.
Now that the cloaks malfunctioned we're seeing the truth.
Damn now that I think of it, I really never should have admitted to stealing that 8 track tape of Pink Floyd's Animals from Woolworths in 1977. Anyone know a good lawyer that can get that reversed?
Redradar @ 2:
Don't believe so, but he loves it when lawyers talk dirty.
Redradar @ 2:
Lawyers never represent themselves because their emotions could screw up their own case. That's why even though he is one, he has hired a lawyer. DUH?
Chucky D @ 18:
Let me know so I can absolve myself from the two penny Bazooka Bubble Gums I pocketed without paying for when I was 7.
So (just for the sake of argument), media induced stress can make a United States senator plead guilty to a crime he didn't commit.
Doesn't this mean that a confession or information given under the "enhanced interrogation methods" is proven unreliable?
Take it back, take it back.
Oh no you can't say that.
All of my friends are not dead
or in jayaaaayaaaaal.
Sweet revenge, sweet revenge
will prevail, without fail.
Get real Larry.No one would ever admit to "guilt" in this case unless they knew their cover was *cough* "blown".
Certainly not a high profile Republican jackass like you.
if i was the judge, i would allow craig to withdraw his plea
this needs to go to trial
and craig needs to stay in the senate
come on guys....i need cheap entertainment
senator craig is a baaaaad boy.....a naaaasty boy
He'll be scrounging for meals soon enough.
Tom Delays Blog
"It is my firm belief and abiding conviction that we as Republicans are a party devoted to setting moral standards and committed to creating a national culture of personal accountability. Democrats, on the other hand, are absent these foundational principles as they prove time and again that they are only interested in misguided allocation of blame, abrogation of personal responsibility and the cultural quandary that is moral relativism."
Ahhh, the legal profession. Tirelessly serving truth and fighting the good fight.
When you read the motion his attorney filed, it really makes him look more guilty. Billy Martin is doing his client a GREAT dis-service by giving him false hope. I hope the motion gets slammed!
Even worse, you know someone he has had sex with is going to come out of the woodwork and show damning evidence that he in fact has had homosexual relations. I have no problem with who he has sex with, just that he is deceiving his family and constituents.
Sen. Larry Craig should be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea in a sex sting because he was under extreme stress after being hounded by journalists asking questions about his sexuality, his lawyer argues.
Can't you tell - he was tapping his toe.
.....Craig did not “knowingly and intelligently enter a guilty plea.”
One wonders if Craig has ever done anything “knowingly and intelligently".
What a bunch of Gay Old Perverts. Check out this list of 60 (or so) leading republican pedophiles:
STOP REPUBLICAN PEDOPHILIA
http://www.armchairsubversive.org/
D.
SOME LAW MAKER
If he is allowed to have a do-over then every person who has entered a plea of guilty has the right to do the same if they wish. Let's hope the judge holds to the law here and stops this hypocrite from getting special treatment.
I don't really care if he tries to get a do-over with regards to his guilty plea. My main interest is whether he is going to try to run for his Senate seat in Nov. 2008. I certainly hope so. And I hope he's the Republican candidate for that ofice.
BLAH @ 20:
He did not go to law school, he didn't finish graduate studies. He did graduate from The University of Idaho - http://craig.senate.gov/lec_biography.cfm
But, yes, any attorney with half a brain should/would never represent himself, especially in a criminal case.
Bullshit!!
He made the plea BEFORE he was hounded by the media.
What if, instead of forcibly withdrawing his plea, it just sort of slips out?
++++
Zenrage @ 37:
Bingo! He even made it clear in his discussion with the cop that he was concerned about having it go to court and get drawn out, he even had about a month to send his guilty plea in, which made it official once the D.A.'s office receives it. So, he had time to consult an attorney. I know four D.A.s and they say an innocent man never pleads guilty!
Thank you Zenrage.
That's what I got out of it. That paper in Boise
hadn't even published anything yet. They might have been
looking, but they didn't have anything publish at the time of the arrest.
And it wasn't a "sting". Weren't there complaints?
That shoe probably needs re-soled after all the tapping it takes to
complain to the airport police. Jeez.
Well the press is always guilty. They made him go looking for beej to relieve the pressure, I'm sure.
But how did the pressure you felt weeks after the beej, affect your guilty plea several weeks earlier? NO one. NO ONE was pressuring him except a blogger or two who no one-- NO ONE--was listening to.
Pretty bad lying there:
"Oh, gee. The press is hounding me about being gay, so I better duck into a toilet and find someone to suck me? And then plead guilty about it because they are hounding me."
QUOTE:
"Sen. Larry Craig should be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea in a sex sting because he was under extreme stress after being hounded by journalists asking questions about his sexuality,..."
DAR
Two points. Craig had, or took, 3 days short of two months to enter his guilty plea. This was not a rushed decision. Also, the paper in question didn't publish their investigative article about him until after he was busted.
I think Craig is absolutely right in putting his foot down.
The first paragraph of his deposition proclaims that "I am a United States Senator". This, and his little business card throwing his weight around thing when arrested (he failed to deliver the classic line, "Do you know who I am?") ought to crank up the interest of a grand jury: did he attempt to influence the police and now the court with his official position? This is called "Abuse of office" and in most states is a felony.
I should think that, at this point, perhaps the prosecutor should take some interest.
As a "United States Senator", Craig ought to know this basic piece of law. After all, this is what he and the 99 other little presidents are allegedly doing - making laws.
If he cannot manage to make the right decision on a simple misdemeanor, how qualified is he to handle much larger laws and issues?
I'm surprised that no one has asked this basic question.
How ridiculous! He had almost a month to seek legal counsel if he was unsure about whether or not to plead guilty. Just because he did something he now regrets (by which I mean that he pleaded guilty and now wants to take it back) does not mean that he was incapable of understanding the charges or what he was pleading to. It is tools like him that have caused so many judges to refuse to accept guilty pleas for petty offenses unless the defendant is represented by counsel. Because of this jackass' behavior, no doubt some 21 year old student and part-time McDonald's employee will be forced to shell out $500 that he can ill afford so that he can plead guilty to disorderly conduct charges after an argument in a bar parking lot, thereby having the distinction of spending more money for an attorney than for the court costs and fine. I did have some very slight amount of sympathy for the man, but at this point I frankly hope that every guy that he's ever picked up in a men's room starts telling their stories.
He actually had six weeks before officially entering his guilty plea. I think that's plenty of time to de-stress, and make a rational decision.
A lawyer who defends himself/herself has a fool for a client.
You know? If the man wasn't such a hypocrite. If he was working for gay rights. If he wasn't so damned better than the people he serves. If he only had a brain. Well, strike that last one, but seriously, I don't think police should be targeting gay people in bathroom stalls. Entrapment is wrong. Just plain wrong. If the gay community was allowed to live in peace and were given rights we all take for granted a few might not need groping in public bathrooms or anywhere else.
Larry Craig is an arsehole. And he has an ego problem if he thinks he can change his guilty plea. But Larry Craig is a man in deep personal trouble. In a kind and just world he could be open about his sexuality and no one would give a damn. But he is a victim of his own party's obsession to destroy that which is different from straight white men. And he is a victim of his own dishonesty.
I think Larry Craig is performing a wonderful public service, and many of you are failing to appreciate his service. He is parading Republican homophobic hypocrisy in the spotlight for everyone to plainly see. He is moving forward.
So I say don't cut and run Senator Craig. I know you already admitted guilt, but go ahead and flip flop and drag this thing to court. Withdraw your plea, and stay the course. Have your lawyer ask for extensions so that the proceeding takes place right around election time. It will make a wonderful surge of timely reminders to the voters of what liars and hypocrites all you Republicans are.
Thank you very much Senator Larry (wide stance) Craig for you recent service to our country. You are truly a pant load.
Didn't he plead "no contest?" Really, Craig has zero grounds to get a trial at this point. And, as a US Senator, he has can't really play the put-upon ignoramis, can he?
let him withdraw his plea only if he can pass a polygraph.
it should be very interesting to see the officer testify in court and physically show the public all the signals that they spoke of after the senator tried influence peddling before copping a plea. Larry will have to explain why the officer tried to not talk about so that it would go to tape, in deference to the perp. Everyone will know what these signals mean now, and it will be a show and tell of bathroom etiquette. the senator is going to have a lot of fun as each day goes by as we learn what those signals are from other people as the descriptions show up on the news, then his friends will tell about their former fun times together. He seems to have made numerous hand and foot gestures that mean specific things he is willing to implant or have implanted. Can't wait until there is a betting pool on what the officer was asked for.
this is good for larry, and good for america.
Capability Jones @ 49:
no ....he pled GUILTY.........and this asshat represents people,and is a lawyer...naw...this dog don't hunt
I hope this blows up in his face. Maybe some new evidence will surface that makes his restroom antics look mild by comparison.
ummm guys
craig was indeed questioned about his sexuality before the guilty plea
way back in the 70s during the first page scandal
he has had nightmares of getting caught ever since
let him stay in office till 08
i love our perveted congress
"...Martin said Monday that Craig did not “knowingly and intelligently enter a guilty plea.”
Oooops that must a been a typo. Should read... "Martin knows damn good and well that Craig did not “knowingly and intelligently enter the stall to pee.”
WWW / BlaHahahahahahah what a lying POS dot HA
The motion makes him sound all the more guilty. It essentially says that he commited perjury to avoid any press in an effort to avoid being labeled as gay after a newspaper was investigating him for being gay.
Now that is quite the motion. Hopefully the lawyer charges a huge hourly fee.
Just wondering ... Are those wrinkles on his forehead or tire tracks from the bus the Republicans threw him under?
Sorry but after reading the motion I have to conclude that the Senator will indeed be able to withdraw his guilty plea. From the motion Page 8 Paragraph 2; "Senator Craig, in submitting his plea by mail, never appeared in court and was never questioned by a judge." If the Senator had entered his guilty plea before a judge as I thought he did, he would have no new legal recourse. But, the fact that he never spoke to a judge, is not himself a lawyer and never received legal consul should be enough to withdraw the guilty plea.
As for when this goes to court, any lawyer worth his or her salt could easily win this for the Senator. What is the crime? The Senator engaged in NO "offensive, obscene, abusive..." activities. I think the public thinks this is a waste of law enforcement resources. And, honestly, did anything really juicy happen? Not really. No organ exposure. No peeking over or under the stall. No actual words were spoken, or, actual propositions made between the two men. For God Sake! This is a "disorderly conduct" charge! The police officer should have let things develop into a real crime. Another minute or two and I'm sure the Senator would have been down on his knees with his pants to his ankles grabbing for the officers crouch and then all of this would be a mute point. But the way things look unless the RNC steps in and stops this madman Senator Craig will go along way legally to helping gay men all over America get off when arrested in bathrooms. All in trying to clear his name from gayness. Priceless. Also this is terrible for the Republican’s, the last thing they need is a large show trial about bathroom behavior and a sitting Republican Senator right around election time.
The fact that this guy has not just retreated to complete obscurity in shame is mind-"blowing" . Every time I see his face, I just chuckle in disgust.
A US Senator is caught cruising and is still out there "mouthing" off? The arrogance and sense of entitlement of these losers in-senses me!
Imagine if he was of any other gender, nationality or race? He would have been drawn and quartered for this.
Ricky Bones @ 39
Uh, if you know four D.A.s who truly believe that, than I'm more concerned for the state of our justice system than I already was. In my state, for a first offense misdemeanor possession of drugs charge, a defendant can plead guilty before trial and, if they successfully complete a probationary period and pay fines, they will have no record. In fact, it is commonly referred to as "probation without verdict" because technically no charges are ever filed against them. Or, they can hire an attorney, proceed to trial and hope and pray that the police will be honest, that no jailhouses "witnesses" will pop up to testify against them, and that they have a jury who understands reasonable doubt; being as if they are convicted they face prison time. It is difficult for me to believe that no innocent people have ever decided to plead guilty in the hopes of just getting it over with, especially since they will have no record.
Ummm... Does it matter if he plead guilty to a misdemeanor disorderly conduct? Is that grounds for dismissal from the senate? Can't he just choose not to resign if he doesn't want to resign? If he manages to reverse his plea, will the Republicans give him his committee seats back?
What a freaking circus! The guy is an idiot regardless of whether he's a perv or not.
The Larrification of America @ 4:
wide stance is a joke defense, think about it,
theres no way he could have a wide stance with feet spread wide, if he is wearing trousers.
He could only be doing a Vitter with feet spread wide...
Sen. Larry Craig should be allowed to withdraw his guilty plea in a sex sting because he was under extreme stress after being hounded by journalists asking questions about his sexuality, his lawyer argues.
Huh? Didn't he keep this all a secret, even from his family? Nobody knew about it until after he pleaded guilty. I am NOT a lawyer and I know a guilty plea is exactly what it says.
The thing about Craig's latest argument is that he's AN ADULT. He's responsible for his own actions even if he was mistaken.
L.A. Confidential @ 27:
This from the guy that hounded a president for two years over personal sexual piccadillos but had some of the youngest, best looking office staff on Capitol Hill. Oh, Tom, you dog, you.
I guess ol' Lavatory Larry figures he's got nothing to lose by belatedly fighting the charge. His reputation is already in the toilet, so to speak. And consider the upside -- he might one day get address the media outside the courthouse and proclaim, "The verdict is in: I'm not gay."
Ricky Bones @ 30:
Oh, you've got to be kidding. You mean to say that you think he might have gotten a little too cozy with Senate pages in 1982 and hasn't kept his nose clean for the past 25 years? I know that some investigative reporter is gathering the goods as we type.
What a loser.
Kathy in St. louis @ 67:
Bad mental pic there with the "...hasn't kept his nose clean..." crack there.
Ooops! I said 'crack.'
Well, then, anyone who's ever been convicted of anything should be allowed to take back their guilty plea too. What's fair for the Senator is fair for everybody else, no?
LOL I love the headline. I hope this goose stepping homo drags* this out forever... what fun. I bet the other GOP queens are having a hissy fit.
* pun intended
gmans @ 58:
Everything I know about law I learned from TV, but, yeah, I read the motion too (seems not many of the people posting comments did), and I've got to agree that he'll be able to withdraw the plea, and a decent lawyer will get him off.
In my illustrious interview with Senator Craig, he clearly explains that he is not a queenie, not light-in-the-loafers, nor is he a fan of The Golden Girls, but in fact, a masculine man's man with prostate problems and a severe case of Restless Leg Syndrome. As a Conservative stalwart, I do hope that puts these ridiculous accusations to rest. Now excuse me, I have my weekly crocheting to do.
WHO WOULD’VE THUNK IT: LARRY CRAIG GOES ‘BOTH WAYS’ ON RESIGNATION
The Larrification of America @ 4:
but he's still not Gay!
And Wide Stance just won't give up will he?
Give it up , bitch.
"I am not a jive turkey, nor have I ever been a jive turkey".
I'm pretty sure our legal system is based on the "no takebacks" principle.
The morning after Larry's first anonymous gay restroom experience (or maybe 6 weeks later), I imagine he tracked the guy down and said "you know - I want to take that back - I was really stressed out and it shouldn't count."
Here in Idaho, Larry always brought home the bacon - ranging from special bills for disaster rebuilding, forest law or commerce considerations. As much fun as it appears to be to kick him around at the present - I am trying to remember that. He was an effective politician for Idaho, even though I disagreed with 2/3rds of what he did - the rest of his constituents gave him an A+, as do many veterans for his military health initiatives.
He attracted and kept quality staff people like Sandy Patano and Dan Whiting - people that I came to know through the years and whom I know were totally loyal to him. I don't think that a total arse would be able to hold onto such good staff. For me, it's time to be a bit more civil - I'm sorry that I laughed at Miss Teen for her "map" gaffe, and now I'm kinda sorry that I find such pleasure in Craig's discomfort. Anybody else feel that way?
Guess who's looking for a foot tapping judge to sit-in on this case and re-in-stall this man's manliness ?
Just practicin the "Texas Two-Step" to the tune of "Hand Jive" yur honor!
Ten minute recess, the defendant will confer in the judge's chambers!
Ardour in the courtroom!
Honest George @ 79:
I agree that there is no need to go overboard but frankly, Craig's selfish hypocrisy and lack of integrity are intolerable. He is a flagrant liar and has the moral scruples of a snake. What we are missing in Washington are quality leadership examples we can look up to that have honesty, integrity, and other centered service as their core values. Craig represents none of those and needs to get out of public service immediately. And as they saying goes---as ye sow---so shall ye reap. Looks like harvest time for Larry.
Does this mean he's 'just not going to take it anymore?'
Or does he still want to give it?
"I could have gotten away with it if it weren't for that meddling Arlen"-Mitch Mcchinless
Sorry gman & essephreak...you're both wrong...
http://www.thehollywoodliberal.com/2007/08/30/comic-larry-craig-in-im-no...
Honest George Says:
For me, it’s time to be a bit more civil - I’m sorry that I laughed at Miss Teen for her “map” gaffe, and now I’m kinda sorry that I find such pleasure in Craig’s discomfort. Anybody else feel that way?
I do George...but first they have to make whole all of the families of the people they've killed.
Then I will be civil to them.
They'll always talk about what a family man he was, loved his wife and his church and his kids and his money and his things.
Hell, even Hitler liked his own dog.
And yet he can "knowingly and intelligently" vote in the most deliberate body in the world?
this moron is still taking legal advice from arlen sphincter. WAFS!
Well Well Well.... Just when I thought I heard the last of old Larry Craig WTF do we have here a man who acts like a woman who can't make up her mind....Gay Gay Gay.... Send him a Tampon and shove it down his Republican throat. JCB
This reminds me of the time when i was in second grade and i flunked a test because my wife's divorce lawyer was hounding me on my cell phone.
I wouldn't let this asshole represent me even if I were a lemming Repub. This jerk can't make up his own mind.
LongTooth @ 43:
He he he. Thanks for the laugh. It's been one of those days.
God, with things like this, it's hard to know where to start - and almost too easy! Doesn't Craig ever stop to think about anything beyond the next 5 minutes? Does he assume everyone is an idiot? Or is it just that the "horror" of being thought homosexual is so much worse than, say, publicly admitting to being a total moron?
What a nice compliment to his constituents - "I'm so damned stupid that I can't intelligently figure out the meaning of the word 'guilty'. And you've been electing me to the Senate to represent you for years! Bwah hah hah!" Yeah, that's definitely better than having people think you might be gay....
And apparently it hasn't occurred to him that if he's allowed to withdraw his guilty plea, it's almost dead certain that the prosecutor will reinstate the original charges. (Even if he wasn't so inclined, he's got to go forward, if for no other reason than it will look like a political wash-job if he doesn't.) Hmm, so now Craig can go to court, open to the public, and try to beat the charges. And despite everyone's insistence that this is an easy case to beat, guess again. There wouldn't be prosecutors around the country regularly bringing these charges if it was impossible to get convictions, and this is a pretty common occurrence.
Craig's best hope isn't a right-wing conservative judge, it's a moderate-to-liberal leftie. That right-wing conservative is going to look at the way Craig behaved and run screaming into the night, because that right-wing conservative is every bit as homophobic as the rest of the Republican party. That moderate leftie is the one more likely to take pity on the poor schmuck - maybe he really didn't understand that he was signaling, and you know, even if he did, is that really a crime?
I don't know what good a do-over would do. He has already pleaded guilty. We're entitled to take him at his word regardless of what happens later.
It just makes a person wonder about just how effective one's presence in the Senate could even be while he or she is having to constantly and publicly agonize over something so trite as their own sexuality 24/7 in their personal life.
I have a campaign motto...for everyone....yes even greens & libertarians....to use this election cycle ('08).....male & female candidates:
Vote for me...I'm not a self-hating gay man, making loads of cash off of getting hateful morons that can barely tie their shows & chew bubble gum to vote for my evil driven agenda & leglislation that will never even be brought up in a session EVER...
Sorry...that's tie their shoes..
I've been under lots of stress before, but it's never made me seek gay sex in a bathroom.
Sorry Larry, but you can not suck or blow the toothpaste back into the tube.
...what a piece of work.
sir, have you no honor? no decency? no....
Now if he can just figure out a way to un-suck all those cocks...
One of his lawyers was on The Today Show yesterday, and when he talked about Craig it sounded just like the stuff you hear from any perpetrator with deep pockets. What I found funny was he seemed to think that Craig can stand on the ignorance of the law excuse for the arrest, the contact with the prosecutor, his written acknowledgement of the guilty plea, and that he thought he could keep it out of the papers.
What he is using is the stupidity defense. He was too stupid to know what he did in the john, with the arrest, with the court, and with the press. I don't know what he did and didn't do in the head, but what he did to get out of his trouble is simply stupid.
One other thing, it's not a good idea to have a lawyer representing you on TV wearing a suit that costs more then a nation news anchor; it's just stupid.
Honest George @ 79:
Honest George, all I can say is this reminds me so much of Marley's Ghost who wore the chain he forged in life when he came back to see Scrooge. If the man wasn't so unctious, parading his false piety about Clinton's "naughty" sins, judging gays, etc., people might be able to overlook his lilttle problem. But absolutely EVERYBODY loves to see a hypocrite get his due. He'll just have to drag around the chain he's forged for himself (no pun intended).
Flip...Flop...Flip...Flop...Flip...Flop... no wonder nothing gets done in the Senate. JCB
Why won't the obviously gay, Craig, just admit he is a bathroom stalker looking for any penis??
Admitting to being a fag because the media made him do it Idaho where the men are men and the sheep are nervous
Honest George @ 79:
Not I. He's republican scum.
Well, I read all 39 sick pages of larry's brief - including the exhibits.
The most telling scrap of evidence is the plea itself.
Approximately 50 days separate the wide stance incident from the affixing of larry's signature to his guilty plea (jun 11 - Aug 1) - so the "pressure" argument re: his failure to obtain counsel is clearly a non-starter. See pages 37-39 of the brief wherein larry puts his signature on each of the 3 pages of the confession/plea agreement.
On these pages he admits, among other things,
1. I have reviewed the arrest report....
2. I understand the charges....
3. I am pleading guilty...
4. I understand the court will not accept a plea of guilty from anyone who claims to be innocent.
5. I now make no claim that I am innocent...
At this point the page contains the first of larry's 3 signatures then moves on to page 2 where:
6. I understand I am entering a guilty plea to a misdemeanor....
7. I am/am not represented by an attorney... (here larry circled am not)
8. I...have reviewed the rights I will be waiving by entering this plea of guilty.
9. I...have...constitutional rights which I knowingly voluntarily and intelligently give up (waive) by entering this plea of guilty: a) the right to trial... b) the right to confront ... witnesses against me. c) The right to remain silent or to testify for myself. d) the right to subpoena witnesses... e) the right to a pretrial hearing to contest the admissibility of evidence...
10. Understanding the above I am entering my plea of guilty freely and voluntarily and without any promises except as noted in number 11 below.
11. (contains details of the agreement including sec violated, sentence and other usual plea agreement conditions.)
12 & 13 are boilerplate for plea agreements.
Here larry signs at the bottom of page 2.
On page 3 larry simply agrees to abide by the conditions of his probation and signs the document for the 3rd & last time. The court filed his petition on Aug 8.
Now we come to the brief to withdraw the plea.
In it, larry's attorney claims that significant items from the above list that were signed off, are not true. In other words larry is not only a toilet stall troll, but he filed a 3x signed plea agreement that is full of lies.
He now claims to have had no understanding of anything (regardless of 2, 4 &10 above); to have maintained his innocence throughout (regardless of 4 & 5 above); To have been under irresistible pressure (regardless of the ~50 intervening days to think, assess, consult etc.); and all this is in addition to his prevarications during the police interview at the airport on Aug 11.
If the ring fits, you hit the shits.
Any judge who falls for this crap should be disbarred.
Joementum @ 57:
lol!
A demonstrable liar.
For Craig to parade his Senate creds as a character reference is bizarre. The American public can't think too highly of the Senate when it so easily accepts the idea that a US Senator trolls public washrooms for illicit gay sex.
Comments are closed on this entry