Breaking - Senate Ethics Committee responds to Larry Craig

And now to pull you away from your regularly scheduled Obama and Hillary debates -- some breaking news concerning Larry Craig's airport debacle.

Just breaking from the Idaho Statesman

WASHINGTON -- The Senate Ethics Committee said Wednesday that Idaho Sen. Larry Craig acted improperly in connection with a men’s room sex sting last year.

In a letter to the Republican senator, the ethics panel said Craig’s attempt to withdraw his guilty plea after his June arrest at a Minneapolis airport was an effort to evade legal consequences of his own actions.

Craig’s actions brought discredit on the Senate, the letter said.

The six members of committee "three Democrats and three Republicans -- told Craig they believed he "committed the offense to which you pled guilty" and that "you entered your plea knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently."

You can find the entire text of the committee's letter to Senator Craig here (pdf).

Sorry for the short diary so far, I'll add more as more info comes out during the evening. I'm also uploading a video to YouTube right now from a newscast here in Idaho.

Here are some links to media outlets reporting on the committee's letter (which all pretty much say the same thing right now).

Idaho Press-Tribune
Fox News
MSNBC

...
the unequivocal notion

•  Oooo

  Larry Craig in the news again.  Can it get any better!!

  by followyourbliss on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 04:46:43 PM PDT

  •  He could endorse McCain.

    by darthstar on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 04:47:11 PM PDT

•  ok, haven't we

  heard about this already?

  OMG, "Wide Stance" is so...yesterday...

  by o the umanity on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 04:47:23 PM PDT

  •  ...

    by DrMicro on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 04:52:12 PM PDT

  •  Wide stance is so yesterday?

    You're kidding, right?

    by gooderservice on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 05:00:23 PM PDT

•  Another bogus waste of time

  while Rome burns.

  by bunny99 on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 04:47:37 PM PDT

  •  If you have something better to do...

    They why aren't you doing it?

    Some of us, particularly in Idaho are interested in things that concern our Senator.

    by FlawedAI on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 04:52:34 PM PDT

    •  I meant Congress wasting time

      not the diarist.  The bottom line is LC got a smack on the hand, and liked it.

      by bunny99 on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 04:55:04 PM PDT

      •  ah...

        I apologize then.

        by FlawedAI on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 04:55:58 PM PDT

        •  no problem

          by bunny99 on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 05:02:55 PM PDT

•  Always glad to rekindle some Rethuglican

  felony or other.  Thanks.  Tipped and rec'd.

  by Little Lulu on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 04:49:02 PM PDT

•  I'm glad to see....

  ...that they are focusing on his behavior AFTER he got arrested, and not the act that actually got him into trouble in the first place.

  by Bryan Scrafford on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 04:53:28 PM PDT

•  Larry Larry Larry

  Poor old Larry .

  by indycam on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 04:54:16 PM PDT

•  The Senate whatnow?

  Never heard of it.

  by Little on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 04:55:20 PM PDT

•  !

  The committee also criticized Craig for using more than $200,000 in campaign funds to pay legal fees related to his case...

  by dharmafarmer on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 04:59:04 PM PDT

  •  Good. If not embezzlement, at least taxable

    income. Hope he doesn't report it. I will.

    by ronlib on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 05:18:17 PM PDT

•  Quick.....

  ..match his voting record to John McCain's. I'll bet they are basically in adjacent stalls with respect to voting patterns.

  by Bensdad on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 05:02:14 PM PDT

•  What did he "ethically" do wrong?

  Believe me, I love every minute Craig's name is in the news... bad for republicans.

  However, I just don't see where the Ethics Committee can hear testimony, review documents, and come up with the conclusion that Craig did some unethical as a senator.

  Craig pleaded guilty.  He felt he had a right to appeal.  He did.

  three Democrats and three Republicans -- told Craig they believed he "committed the offense to which you pled guilty"

  I honestly don't know that they can possible "conclude" that.  I don't think Craig is compelled to testify against himself in front of the Ethics Committee,  so it just sounds like the Committee acted as judge and jury in a criminal or misdemeanor, whatever it is, action.

  I don't see how that is their purview.

  Maybe I just don't know enough about the rules, but... (And I'm not defending Craig one bit.)

  by gooderservice on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 05:06:14 PM PDT

  •  Is this snark? How about the crime part? nt

    by ronlib on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 05:21:08 PM PDT

    •  Sorry, not a snark.

      Sorry, but I am confused.  I'm just not understanding the whole thing, or what the committee's responsibilities are or what the "rules" are.

      For instance, when this first came up, I heard that this "crime" falls in the same category as a speeding ticket... misdemeanor.  I haven't heard of any ethics ruling against a senator for a speeding ticket.  That's all I'm saying.

      And why was it the committee's responsibility to believe or not believe he "committed the offense to which you pled guilty"  Where do they get the authority to believe or disbelieve what somebody pled to or a jury decided.  That's pretty clear-cut.  It was like they were re-litigating it again.

      Believe me, I'm not arguing about this, I'm not taking his side at all... I just don't understand the rules on this.

      by gooderservice on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 06:03:29 PM PDT

  •  they're saying that...

    ... the matter should be investigated because he tried to initially prevent charges by saying that he was a Senator, then tried to plea guilty to avoid press coverage, and now has spent hundreds of thousands in campaign donations in a potentially illegal manner while trying to overturn his guilty plea.

    by Bryan Scrafford on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 05:21:36 PM PDT

•  Idaho state Hall of Fame should

  be damn proud. Their newest member is a senate celebrity.

  by ronlib on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 05:14:13 PM PDT

•  Christ, is this guy still in the Senate?

  What an arrogant prick ass dickhead jerk!

  by CA Libertarian on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 05:19:11 PM PDT

•  He pled guilty to a lesser charge.

  The ethics committee can't do a thing.

  by nupstateny on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 05:58:03 PM PDT

•  Hmm...

  Kinda surprised this isn't on the Rec list. This is pretty big news, if you think about it. A bipartisan panel ethics panel basically just told Craig he's playing games, we don't believes your lies, and that we believe you were in the bathroom for the very act the police officer arrested you for - soliciting sex, otherwise known as prostitution.

  Then again, quick! Look over there! it's an Barillary Obaminton diary!

  by Stand Strong on Wed Feb 13, 2008 at 06:01:27 PM PDT