|
September 01, 2007
What if?
Having just read about Larry Craig's resignation, and listened carefully to the audio of his extended argument with the arresting officer (transcript here), I'm once again struck by the man's astounding stupidity in not having had the common sense to get a lawyer. No jury would have convicted him. But does that matter? Let's assume he'd hired a lawyer and gone to trial. Wouldn't it have been a huge media event -- possibly even bigger than this one? Wouldn't there have been the same calls for his resignation, even if he'd been acquitted? I don't know, but I think there might have been nearly identical calls for him to resign -- to "spare the country the embarrassment of a trial." As it is, there appears to have been no crime committed, and that doesn't seem to matter, because he pleaded guilty. That might not have mattered either. (Did Mark Foley ever plead guilty? To anything?) In politics, an accusation seems to be enough. (Especially when Republicans are accused.) MORE: Craig is toast, so his career in the Senate is no longer the point here. But after listening to that recording, I find myself left with a very unsettling feeling that this case simply does not make sense. Not only did nothing illegal happen on the face of these facts, but there was no underlying criminal charge which could have been brought. Yet a three-term United States Senator pleaded guilty. Why? Unless he is a moron or insane, he had to know this was a career-ending move. For the life of me, I cannot understand it. I am not alone in my suspicions. Here's a police officer posting at FreeRepublic.com: I listened to the tape of Senator Craig being interviewed by Officer Karsnia and I've got to tell you that in over a decade in Law Enforcement I've never been so ashamed....(Original post here, along with some interesting comments.) No probable cause, and not even an underlying crime. Just a bunch of mutually disputed hot air. An argument over whether feet touched and a hand was seen. So the allegations wouldn't support the arrest, even if a charge was theoretically possible. (It is not a crime in Minnesota to signal a willingness to have sex, but even if it was, there's no clear evidence of a signal.) Were I a paranoid sort, I might wonder whether this was some kind of political setup, and Craig was made to go along with it. (There's no way to know.) UPDATE: Via Glenn Reynolds, here's Mark Steyn's reaction to hearing the tape: after listening to the post-arrest audio tape of Craig's interview with police Sgt. Dave Karsnia, I find myself inclining toward Henry Kissinger's pronouncement on the Iran/Iraq war: It's a shame they both can't lose. As it happens, I passed by the very same men's room at the Lindbergh Terminal only a couple of months ago. I didn't go in, however. My general philosophy on public restrooms was summed up by the late Derek Jackson, the Oxford professor and jockey, in his advice to a Frenchman about to visit Britain. "Never go to a public lavatory in London," warned Professor Jackson. "I always pee in the street. You may be fined a few pounds for committing a nuisance, but in a public lavatory you risk two years in prison because a policeman in plain clothes says you smiled at him."Steyn thinks he's guilty, and he is guilty for the simple reason that he pleaded guilty. But wouldn't the mere accusation have been enough? Styen doesn't think the "hypocrisy" is quite as sinful as so many people seem to think, and neither do I. But I have to admit, I have a bit of a problem in seeing the immorality of exchanging signals. At most, that's what happened here. For the umpteenth time, where's the sex? Or don't things like that matter anymore? It seems to me that to condemn Craig for public sex, there has to be more than a feeling of a signaling. And more than just a signal for a sexual proposition, but a signal for a proposition to engage in public sex. I say this as someone who has been propositioned repeatedly, and asked to go somewhere in private. If someone winked at me in a bathroom, or tapped me on the foot, even if I thought the person was cruising, I wouldn't necessarily assume it meant here and now. A signal of willingness to have sex is not public sex. And what, precisely, is a signal? A tap of the foot? A wink of the eye? A crooking of the finger? A nod of the head? This is not trivial nitpicking if people are to be arrested for signals. But this is all academic. (In that regard, I will state now that the bathrooms at UC Berkeley, where I attended college, were notorious for T-room trade, and I never had sex in them. Does that make me a moral conservative?) AND ANOTHER WHAT IF: Suppose that a man wanted to have sex with a sexily-attired woman, who turned out to be working undercover as police officer. Would a "signal" (even a tap on the foot or finger-crooking) be enough to make an arrest? I don't work as a vice officer, but I doubt it. My memory is that there has to be a clear proposition to do something illegal. Otherwise, the arrested "Johns" would be irate. (Even though they're "guilty.") posted by Eric on 09.01.07 at 03:21 PM
Comments
Larry Flynt's money gets results again. He got Gingrich during the impeachment hearings. He almost got Hyde. He got Foley, in a beautifully choreographed sting. The only reason this wasn't held until just before the election is the timing was dictated by the court, and the guilty plea. David Dreier has been in Flynt's sights for years. Beautiful young men keep showing up and flirting with Dreier at public and semi-public events - while long lenses wait for a good reaction. http://www.larryflynt.com/notebook.php?id=88 A4J · September 2, 2007 12:42 AM I'M INTRODUCING A LINE OF POLITICAL CHARGED OUTERWEAR. FIRST IN THE LINE WILL BE, SCREW DIPLOMACY OUTERWEAR. PLEASE CONTACT ME AT ANOZZFAN26@AIM.COM IF YOU ARE SO INTERESTED FRANK QUARTIER · September 2, 2007 09:34 AM In politics, an accusation seems to be enough. (Especially when Republicans are accused.) Please, just stop with this pathetic victim nonsense. The only people initially asking Craig to step down were Republicans. The people who eventually forced Craig out were Republicans. The Presidential candidate who fired Craig from his campaign, calling him "disgusting", was a Republican. Your party won the White House in 2004 on the strength of homophobic Ohioans. Stop trying to pass the buck: Craig and his unceremonious exit is all you. You own it. Blue Texan · September 2, 2007 10:48 AM Your party won the White House in 2004 on the strength of homophobic Ohioans. Geez. And all this time I thought Diebold rigged the election!! Twn · September 2, 2007 12:19 PM And *I* thought it was because of the voter-fraud scare tactics designed to intimidate such well-known homo-lovin' groups as African-Americans, Hispanic-Americans and Undocumented-Americans. jason · September 2, 2007 09:19 PM That fact that I can't stand the Democrats more than I can't stand the Republicans does not make me responsible for the Republicans. And the idea of making all sex outside of marriage "left wing" is just insane. Homosexuality becomes leftist, pornography becomes leftist, Playboy becomes leftist, philandering becomes leftist, what next? Will masturbation become leftist? This can only end in disaster for the GOP. For years I have been asking a very simple question: Tell me where it is engraved in granite that if you are a homosexual, you have to be a socialist? I think some Republicans want that to be engraved in the GOP platform. What are they smoking? Eric Scheie · September 2, 2007 10:06 PM "[W]hat next? Will masturbation become leftist?" If you're ambidextrous, would that make you bipartisan? nobody important · September 4, 2007 10:22 AM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
September 2007
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
September 2007
August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Never too late to Kettle-blog the debate
Meanwhile, the Newt Lobby grows in strength... (And crushes small business...) Global Warming Causes..... Waiting for the other hsu to tap? "Saturate us with resources" What if they gave a Republican sex scandal and nobody came? Greenpeace Knocks Wind Out Of Ted Kennedy's Sails I'll never get enough of not enough! America is gone? "when is enough enough?"
Links
Site Credits
|
|
The Clinton defense might have worked if run correctly...
"I did not have sex with that man."