Judge questions ex-Sen. Larry "Wide Stance" Craig's use of campaign cash to pay for legal defense



I never thought I'd ever have to drag out an old Larry Craig images, but here we go. You remember Craig, right? He found himself in some legal hot water after being arrested for lewd conduct in an airport men's room. He allegedly solicited sex. Allegedly. There was foot-tapping and wide-stancing and a lot of "I love my wife-ing."

And apparently, a lot of legal fees.

(AP) -- A federal judge sounded skeptical Monday of former Sen. Larry Craig's claim that he properly used $217,000 in campaign funds for his legal defense after his arrest in a 2007 airport bathroom sex sting. 

Craig is saying that his trip was "official" since he was traveling between Idaho and Washington for work, and therefore his campaign money could cover it. The judge disagreed.

[Judge] Jackson pointed out a letter Craig's lawyers wrote to the Senate Ethics Committee in 2007 describing Craig's arrest and conviction as "purely personal conduct unrelated to the performance of official Senate duties."

"I'm supposed to ignore that?" she asked.

Larry Craig wanted us to ignore a lot of things.

  • Let's examine who the real abusers and takers are. Who continues to game the system? Who thinks their election to public service ENTITLES them to manipulate and circumvent the law, use campaign funds donated by the taxpayer to pay their rent and their lawyers. And then somehow they forget they work for us and think they are Lords over us and know what we do and do not want, vote according to their own warped opinions and beliefs regardless of what the people want.
    Ultimately, if convicted, we will have to feed Larry, give him cable TV and protect his rights. 

  • labman57

    Best case scenario:  he was in the restroom to "do his business", albeit not the "official" kind (i.e., not work-related)

    Worst case scenario:  he was in the restroom in order to offer somebody in the adjacent stall a "job", again not the official kind.

    Sorry, Larry.  Your wide stance requires far too wide of an interpretation to consider your activities in an airport bathroom to be work-related.