TrishAndHalli.com

Where we bring you fresh opinions on Idaho government, observations on life in general, great recipes, and an opportunity to comment on them all!

RSS Feeds, Etc.

Get New Posts Via Email! Enter your e-mail address and hit the 'Subscribe' button. Your address will never be sold or spammed.

About

Profile TrishAndHalli.com
Where we bring you fresh opinions on Idaho government, great recipes, and an opportunity to comment on them!.

Archives

Categories

Pages

Blogroll

Conservative News

General Interest

Idaho Falls Links

Idaho Politics

Left-Leaning Idaho

Libertarian Links

Pro-life Organizations


Jerry Sproul, CPA
ThoughtfulConsideration.com

Please take a moment to visit our sponsors!

Larry Craig: Guilty, or Just Guilty of “Pleading Guilty”?

August 30th, 2007 by Halli

There are many holes in the accusations against Larry Craig.

So many holes, in fact, that the Idaho Statesman has invested tens of thousands of dollars and months of Dan Popkey’s life to investigate Larry Craig’s sexual orientation and behavior over the past 40 years, but DID NOT GO PUBLIC with anything until they learned Craig had pleaded guilty to “disorderly conduct” in the Minneapolis-St. Paul Airport.

Dan Popkey admits every lead he followed (including allegations from Craig’s college days at the University of Idaho in the late ’60’s) failed to yield one single verifiable event. Dan Popkey says:

The Statesman followed dozens of leads about alleged sexual partners. Two prevalent rumors swirl around two men who are dead. The Statesman has found no written record of sexual intimacy between those men and Craig. Relatives of those men are dead, unaware of proof to substantiate the rumors, or unreachable.

Two other alleged partners unequivocally denied having been intimate with Craig. Other accounts are simply unfounded. Some were inconclusive.

Nevertheless, Monday’s news of Craig’s plea unleashed a torrent of accusations, innuendo, rumor, hearsay and gossip in the pages of the Statesman, (and from countless other media outlets), all of which is much more sensational that the simple admission that the accounts were “denied…unfounded…inconclusive.”

The police case against Craig is thin, at best. All of the actions he is alleged to have engaged in can have simple and innocent explanations. Craig never voiced an intent to engage in homosexual sex with the policeman.

So what is Senator Craig actually guilty of?

Why, he’s guilty of pleading guilty.

And for that crime he has already been punished with nearly unprecedented media attention, ridicule, and the loss of committee leadership positions. He is being urged to resign by members of his own party, members who might once have been called friends, who might also have been expected to come to the defense of an otherwise dignified and effective senator.

After decades of honorable public service, Craig faces shame and disgrace throughout the remainder of his life, wherever and however he chooses to spend it.

Granted, it is difficult to claim innocence after a guilty plea.

But enough questions remain that the Senator ought to have been given the benefit of the doubt. As Sean Hannity observed, the story just doesn’t add up. (For tongue-in-cheek advice to Craig which showcases the preposterous premises on which the charges are based, read Varifrank’s “In Defense of Larry Craig“.)

There is more to this than we’ve been told.


If you enjoyed this article, consider subscribing to the full-feed RSS.

Posted in Family Matters, Politics in General | 3 Comments »

3 Responses

  1. Bill Sali Fan Says:

    Hooray! I knew I wasn’t the only person defending Senator Craig!
    ( http://billsalifan.blogspot.com/2007/08/standing-up-for-senator-larry-craig-and.html )

  2. big deal Says:

    you don’t need to voice intent for intent to be demonstrated. it must be a sad little vacume of the world you live in to pick and chose the evidence you want to believe in.

    read the arrest report, does craigs statements upon arrest sound like an innocent confused old man? “NO!” “What happens nows?” refusing to go with the cop? if he was innocent he would have said things like “whats the problem officer”

  3. BroncoP3t3 Says:

    Larry Craig is the only one with any reason to hide anything. “Granted, it is difficult to claim innocence after a guilty plea.” You said it.

Leave a Comment

Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.

Copyright © 2oo6 by TrishAndHalli.com Powered by Wordpress          
Ported by ThemePorter - template by Design4 | Sponsored by Cheap Web Hosting