- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
Craig Attorney Rails Against Ethics Probe
Email
ShareSeptember 05, 2007 1:22 PM
ABC News' Jack Date Reports: Sen. Larry Craig's legal team has sent a letter to the Senate Ethics Committee, saying the panel does not have any jurisdiction to investigate the Idaho Republican's June arrest for lewd conduct in a men's restroom in the Minneapolis airport.
Stanley Brand, Craig's attorney representing him on matters before the committee, wrote in a letter to Chairwoman Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., "we believe sufficient facts are available from the proffered basis for the complaint - a misdemeanor for disorderly conduct wholly unrelated to the performance of official duties - for the Committee to conclude that there is no precedent for asserting jurisdiction over such conduct."
The letter goes on to state, "Assertion of jurisdiction over this matter by the Committee would be literally unprecedented and would create deleterious consequences for the Senate as a whole."
The Senate's Republican leadership moved swiftly to call for an ethics investigation last week, just one day after the details of the arrest and Craig's August guilty plea to a lesser charge of disorderly conduct were first reported in a Capitol Hill newspaper.
Craig has since proclaimed his innocence, and though he announced his resignation from the Senate effective Sept. 30, a show of support from Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Penn., and a renewed effort to review his legal options, have reportedly caused Craig to reconsider his decision to leave.
September 5, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (6)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Is it arguable that someone that commits ethically incorrect acts in public should be safe to have juristiction in our country's government? I understand personal matter is personal matter, but if they are in the public eye and committing lewd acts, does it not show what kind of person they are in the senate?
Posted by: Erica | Sep 5, 2007 1:56:17 PM
Let me see, this is a publicly performed misdemeanor unrelated to Craig's official duties and not subject to investigation.
So why did Ken Starr investigate Clinton for an action which was totally legal and in private and had nothing to do with his official duties, and Senator Craig vote to convict him as a result of that investigation?
Posted by: ntsc | Sep 5, 2007 3:57:20 PM
My guess is that Craigs colleagues in Congress have a pretty good idea of his character. He felt it necessary to offer a pre-emptive denial of drug use and misconduct with minors in 1982. My understanding of ethics complaints in Congress is that all matters germane to the original charge, the mens room comedy, can be voiced. Mitch wants Larry to go away. I'm sure he feels it would be better now than if the landslide of information being received by the media pans out and is made public.
Posted by: ommish | Sep 5, 2007 4:47:46 PM
where is the ethics investigation for VITTER?
Posted by: dfw | Sep 5, 2007 5:30:55 PM
It is probably a rhetorical question, but Vitter is protected by Republicans because a Democratic governor would appoint his replacement. Butch Otter (no pun intended), the Governor of Idaho, can be counted on to appoint someone like Craig, only maybe more discrete and certainly smarter, to replace him.
Posted by: ommish | Sep 5, 2007 6:23:37 PM
I don't think any attorney worth his salt should use "Probe" and "Craig" in the same sentence. Now really.
Posted by: Sandra Lea | Sep 7, 2007 5:37:59 PM
Post a comment
