Actor and commentator Ben Stein strongly defended Larry Craig on Friday's "Your World with Neil Cavuto," arguing that the police officer who arrested the Idaho Republican senator used "Gestapo tactics" to "browbeat" him into pleading guilty when, in fact, Craig had not committed any illegal act.
"He didn't do anything. He tapped his foot," Stein said. "And I don't like the idea that people are sitting in the next stall from you at a public bathroom listening to whether or not you tap your foot. This is, as I said, Gestapo tactics, Gestapo, Gestapo, Gestapo. It's not America."
Video: Windows Media (5.6 MB) Real (5.1 MB) Audio: MP3
Transcript follows:
NEIL CAVUTO: Well former Nixon adviser Ben Stein thinks that Craig was simply railroaded. Ben is the author of yet another great book, probably another best seller, 'The Real Stars.' He joins me now from California. Ben what do you make of this?
BEN STEIN ('The Real Stars' Author): I make of it that it was pure police entrapment and thuggery. I make of it that the fact that the police have real work to do at the airport. It's an airport, hello? There are security problems at airports. Al Qaeda are you listening? Our security people are entrapping perfectly honest U.S. senators in lavatory stalls instead of looking for you terrorists.
This guy went in there, as far as we know, all he did was tap his foot or listen to somebody else tap his foot. He didn't do an illegal act, he didn't do an indecent act. A policeman drags him off, or verbally drags him off, starts browbeating him, essentially threatens he's going to ruin his career if the guy doesn't plead guilty right away.
This is Gestapo tactics in Minneapolis-St. Paul. It's not nice.
CAVUTO: So why did the senator go along and plead--
STEIN: --I think he was just, look I've spent a lot of time in Idaho, these are very nice, innocent people. They're not legal eagles, they're not tough guys, they're not schtarkers, as we say in Yiddish. He's a guy who was afraid his reputation would be ruined if this policeman made whatever he knew public, all right, the policeman obviously already did that. And so he went along, thinking that it'd all stay quiet.
But he didn't do anything. He tapped his foot. And I don't like the idea that people are sitting in the next stall from you at a public bathroom listening to whether or not you tap your foot. This is, as I said, Gestapo tactics, Gestapo, Gestapo, Gestapo. It's not America.
CAVUTO: What do you think of some of the Republicans who've said 'resign,' talk about shooting first and asking questions later?
STEIN: I cannot believe. This is just what they did to Trent Lott. Trent Lott did a totally innocent, a slightly amusing, slightly silly thing. They kicked him out of there even though he was a great leader.
Now they're doing it to Larry Craig. He hasn't done anything wrong and they're ganging up on him. This is some way to treat the people who have been loyal members of your party for many years. What did he do wrong? Suppose, he was soliciting for gay sex. Gay sex is not illegal in the United States, the Supreme Court has said that. If it were illegal, it would be a different story. It's not illegal, he didn't do anything illegal they're just bludgeoning him into a confession.
CAVUTO: So what do you think happens now? If the message is, at least from authorities, that you can go ahead and browbeat someone into the point of making this admission--Maybe like you say, Ben, they realized, hey we have this big senator here, this could make our careers if we bring him down. What then?
STEIN: I think the message is that the executive branch can belittle and destroy the legislative branch, that they can sting anyone they want and ruin his career. I've seen that happen with legislators over and over again. On trumped up charges, they bring down the legislator and change the balance of power within the United States generally. This is a really serious case of police overreaching and the victim here is Larry Craig and the constitution of the United States.
CAVUTO: All right, you're arguing a position that not many have, thank goodness for that. Ben Stein, thank you very much.
—Matthew Sheffield is Editor of NewsBusters.
















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
No matter what you choose
September 3, 2007 - 12:11 ET by robert108No matter what you choose to believe about Craig, there is one question that has, so far, gone unanswered: Why did the police, voluntarily and without a lawyer present, reduce the charge to disorderly conduct? If they really had him on sex charges, why didn't they go forward?
Another question: Why is this such a big deal, when Hillary has been taking campaign money from felons with foreign connections? That should be the big story right now.
Media reasoning?
September 3, 2007 - 12:17 ET by Mica the MagnificentBecause everybody knows Hillary and Bill would sell out this country to the highest bidder; no-one knew Sen. Craig was a bathroom troll.
Around my area, if you're
September 3, 2007 - 12:34 ET by drillanwrAround my area, if you're pulled over for a traffic violation, if the cop wishes he can put down you didn't have on your seatbelt, which tacks on more money to the fine ...
Hey, it's your word against his ... and who do you think the judge will believe?
Agreed on Hillarygate, but...
September 3, 2007 - 12:35 ET by sarcasmoTo answer your Waterclosetgate question, the court system relies largely on plea agreements to keep from becoming TOTALLY bogged-down in cases. A plea settles quickly, usually with a check that goes to the system, which doesn't hurt. Such reductions in charges (even when prosecutors have a good case, unlike here!) are common, at least in Florida, and probably there, too.
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
robert108
September 3, 2007 - 21:05 ET by SportPoliticsI'll answer that question for you. They NEVER have proof of the charge they cite. They ALWAYS cite a higher charge, or preferrably three four of five other charges that they "come up with", especially in something so kooky as this, and in all the high profile US attourney cases, and in all their crazy crap - they lie as much as possible to come up with massive charges - so they can bargain down on false charges to have "something left to stick em with" - and then claim all the while they were being nice and the perp got away with "reductons in his crimes"... The "pubic" will always believe there is something more to this, NO MATTER WHAT. The cops and everyone else knows this, but it DOESN'T MATTER. So what they do is ALSO make accusations public like "he didn't flush" (the cop ordered him out, of course a good cop wouldn't mention that he didn't let the guy flush the toilet, but in gestapo tactics it's always the perps fault, not mister piggies)- "he put his bag against the door to hide his intended lewd acts" ( no lewd acts committed, noone else in the stall with him, nowhere else to put ones bag ) - but THAT doesn't matter, the pig cites his "experience" --- YES IT'S LAUGHABLE, YES ITS A PIG LIE, BUT NOONE CARES. So the deal is, make up a gazillion trumped up lies as charges, then when they bargain down to "peanuts" they're reall happy and relieved, and everyone screams they got off nearly scott free, besides of course knowing they are a disgusting perp who needs more punishment... Wala, Craig gets more punishment, and the drooling bloodthirsty morons claim they got another one, another big fat perpy liar... The cops are happy, the news is happy, the slathering public is happy, everyone's happy.
Thanks to Ben Stein for being one of the very few with the guts to tell the truth.
"Gestapo, Gestapo, Gestapo. It's not America"
September 3, 2007 - 12:15 ET by kch50428Right - it's not America, it's Minneapolis, MN.
That's funny! Having
September 3, 2007 - 12:22 ET by BlondeThat's funny!
Having lived in a suburb of the Twin Cities for ten months many years ago, your statement really made my day.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Dirty Dems
September 3, 2007 - 15:21 ET by nkviking75As a native of Minneapolis who lived there for a year as an adult, I promise you that the Twin Cities are not overrun with moralists.
Whatever the truth about Craig is, it's too bad it's so much harder to get rid of dirty Democrats. The GOP is full of saints compared to the sleazebag donkey party.
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
It's the battle of the Fox News employees!
September 3, 2007 - 12:29 ET by sarcasmoJim Pinkerton said dump him, and if you can find the transcript he even says more about the case, which doesn't sound good for Craig if he keeps trying to fight it... And I'm far from an expert on this, having learned WAY more than I ever wanted to know in the past week or so, but "those who know" say the behavior-pattern all fits, but if he's not guilty the moral of the story is "don't plead guilty!" I would hope we as a party can agree to try to get over this incident without dragging it out...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
rofl Pinkerton-
September 3, 2007 - 21:15 ET by SportPoliticsPinkerton, another closet faggot just waiting to breakout like Ron Paul. Yes, let's believe another closeted one about their desire for hardcore enforcement.
I read the article, and it is STUPID. Here is his defense:
" Otherwise, the jibing words of critics will ring true to many; as sex-blogger Susie Bright put it, "From now on, as far as I'm concerned, every single Republican legislator is a Reeking Freak Closet Case until proven innocent."
Yes, there is of course, the reason. Other people are supremely unreasonable, especially crazed demo leftists with sex blogs, so we must do the right thnig to quell the possibility that every republican will be a queer if Craig isn't dumped...
Yeah, I can see why closet queer Pinkerton thinks like this. He's gotta keep his backside covered.
Win Ben Stein's Money
September 3, 2007 - 12:31 ET by third eyeLet's try "Senators and the things they solicit in bathrooms" for $200
I like Ben, but here he is
September 3, 2007 - 12:53 ET by CrimsonfistedI like Ben, but here he is wrong. He wasn't tapping his foot, he moved his foot to touch the cop's foot, PLUS he peeped in on the cop in the stall. AND he lied about "waiting for a stall to open" because the cop was well aware that stalls were available. And Craig knew it too. AND he lied about reaching for something on the floor which is why his hand suddenly appeared under the stall, with his palm UP. Why would you pick up anything on the floor that wasn't yours in a bathroom like that? You wouldn't. It's filthy. The cleaners can use plastic gloves.
It is the LYING that got him in the most trouble. Not the act. Which he denies.
WhatAMaroon
Stein has a point, but...
September 3, 2007 - 12:55 ET by mattm...I don't see how an innocent man could get browbeat into pleading guilty to something this petty. I've never been in a situation like that, but I would think a truly innocent person would have said, "I'm not guilty of anything. See you in court."
The bottom line, however, is that this would be a non-story if Craig had a (D) after his name.
Right Ben
September 3, 2007 - 13:14 ET by iveseenitallBen is right and, besides, it's much ado about nothing --except politics and,dare I say it, --sex. Kennedy murdered a girl, lied, and got away with it. And we all know about Barney and Gary. Craig is in the wrong party and does not have enough money and influence. Sickening.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
I basically agree, but...
September 3, 2007 - 13:27 ET by mattm...that's all the more reason Craig should have plead guilty to nothing. When will Republicans ever learn that if they fail to fight back they'll just keep getting more of this?
They ought to know by now that the least little thing can get them bounced from office, whereas the Dems get away with rape, murder, fraud, assault, bribery, etc. etc.
Even if Craig was "cruising" he should have fought back instead of giving in, especially since he really didn't do anything illegal.
I didn't see much fighting
September 3, 2007 - 15:05 ET by TruthMongerI didn't see much fighting back on behalf of Craig by his "fellow" conservatives...
This just was not worthy of Craig's job loss anyway you cut it...the evidence and guilty plea proves nothing of that sort...
My new theory is the Repubs just wanted to contrast themselves to the Dems for the upcoming convention PR...lovely...Larry is an unfortunate victim of timing here...
And furthermore the Repubs might have actually leaked this themselves just for the timing - after all this happened 3 months ago or something and we're just hearing about it now?
True to my promise I'm voting completely Democrat this Fall - for the first time in my life:) - it's entirely due to this Craig situation - I'm not supporting the Republican backstabbers that abanoned Craig in his hour of need and threw him to the wolves like this...
You are going to vote
September 3, 2007 - 16:57 ET by MidAmericaYou are going to vote democrat because the Republicans are 'backstabbers'?
Have you heard of a senator named Joe Leiberman?
I'm not going to be a party
September 3, 2007 - 17:48 ET by TruthMongerI'm not going to be a party to a group that so brazenly disregards basic civil rights and the law - at least the Dems are not this retarded - the whole RNC has its head up its ass right now...
Bye bye republican idiots - I'm outta here...
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
TM
September 3, 2007 - 17:53 ET by BlondeDude,
You better turn that sarcasm meter up a tad....I'm afraid people here might take you seriously. Not me, of course....but, you know.
Although I do basically agree about the RNC at this particular point in time.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
sorry blonde, the sarc is
September 3, 2007 - 18:13 ET by TruthMongersorry blonde, the sarc is off...
I probably shoulda been outta here a long time ago what with immigratioin and spending anyway...
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
note
September 3, 2007 - 17:23 ET by mattmArlen Specter says Craig should fight the case.
BTW: Go ahead anv vote Dem this fall, just make sure you hold your nose and vote GOP NEXT fall. ; )
Arlen rocks:)
September 3, 2007 - 18:11 ET by TruthMongerHmmm, my little groundswell movement is taking off nicely:)...thanks for the heads up matt! I'll give Arlen a call...
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
Exactly. And I've not heard
September 3, 2007 - 17:37 ET by balboaExactly. And I've not heard of this "brow-beating" before. What was said? How do you get brow-beat into a lesser charge?
Did you hear...
September 3, 2007 - 18:07 ET by mattm..the tape? It sounded like the cop was doing some browbeating trying to get Craig to admit he was looking for love in all the wrong places... It is plausible that he plead guilty trying to make the story go away...but then again....
I'm more worried about how quickly Craig gets bounced whereas others, even some who are guilty of way worse things, seem to skate...
brow-beating sounds like
September 3, 2007 - 18:14 ET by TruthMongerbrow-beating sounds like a gay thing to me - has this cop been arrested? Lost his job yet - he did some shoe touching too!!!
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
How do you not remember
September 3, 2007 - 19:02 ET by balboaHow do you not remember whether your foot bumped someone else's foot in a stall? That's not a regular thing, you're not in a crowd of people. And why are you picking up a piece of paper from a bathroom stall floor in an airport?
Don't hear much brow-beating. More disagreeing.
...it happens to me all the
September 3, 2007 - 19:08 ET by TruthMonger...it happens to me all the time:)! Can't remember them all - I got a wide stance...
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
It's not rock solid.
September 3, 2007 - 20:26 ET by mattmPotato - potah'to...
It was really only the cop's interpretation of his actions that led to the charge of soliciting sex - no sex occured and none was ever really solicited - except by interpretation. So, it isn't far fetched for Craig to say he plead guilty to disorderly conduct in order to get the whole episode behind him.
There have been cases where the cops were able to get confessions out of innocent people. I'm not making any conclusions one way or another in this case. To me, the incident is small potatoes - or potah'toes...except for the possible political/media angle....
I just think that Ben
September 3, 2007 - 20:53 ET by balboaI just think that Ben Stein's claim of railroading is ridiculous. He's a U.S. senator. He handled this so poorly, it's a wonder he ever got elected.
...
September 3, 2007 - 20:58 ET by mattmHe got more votes than the other guy... : )
Well, sure, if THAT's how
September 3, 2007 - 21:02 ET by balboaWell, sure, if THAT's how you want to decide elections. ;-)
Why is that so poorly balboa ?
September 3, 2007 - 21:29 ET by SportPoliticsI think he did a fine job on the interview tape. He first is heard saying " Am I gonig to have to take you to court!" to the pig. The pig quickly says "I don't want to go to court" - Craig tells him " You solicited me" - the cop responds " WE're not going to get into that" - Craig then says - " Well you shouldn't be entrapping people "...
I don't understand how anyone can hear anything but a person who is angry as hell and is very combative to EVERYTHING the officer has done so far.
I guess the "gay humping cruiser" ideas outweigh the entire sequence for NEARLY EVERYONE.
Craig even tells him about his "hand" being under the divider " You saw something that DIDN'T HAPPEN".
I guess I just don't quite understand, other than the drooling moronic public can't enough - all the dems because it's a repub, all the repubs because it's a "closet faggot".
I say I learned quite a bit about how STUPID the VAST MAJORITY of my fellow Americans are.
the biggest mistake Craig
September 4, 2007 - 03:36 ET by Conservative Voicethe biggest mistake Craig made was keeping it a secret...if he came home to his wife and was all mad at the cop for putting him in that position...like I do when I feel wronged, or tell his lawyer, or his campaign people. Because he kept it a secret, right or wrong, it makes people go hmmm.
I don't know if he is guilty or not, but I don't think it is something he should be thrown out on, and I definately don't think it is hypocritical for a homosexual ( not calling him gay ) to vote for stronger family values. I think the hypocritical card is played too much.
Mr. Sheffield, please list the facts
September 3, 2007 - 14:07 ET by Lame CherryMr. Sheffield, my brother and I were discussing the Craig situation (Caveat yes he needs counselling), but this story sat for 3 months without anything happening which is odd and which means the powerful people pushed this story to explode as it did.
I would like you to go back though and look at a few things Mr. Sheffield. Remember a certain conservative Congressman who had his house ransacked by the FBI who was supporting an investigation into the Clinton's on 9 11? He was in short order unelected to Congress.
Prey tell and I mean PREY tell, not one year ago a George Allen, the most conservative of all conseratives who would have swept into the White House somehow had all these wicked stories ran about him and that bully Jim Webb took his seat when Webb didn't have a chance.
Then there was Rick Santorum, another conservative given the big boot in biased coverage............then we come to Mr. Conservative, NRA, over a 90 rating on the American Conservative scale being booted out office in a staged attack as Ben Stein writes upon.
There are more than this, but in little over a year 4 major conservatives have been booted from office.........I will add that Ron Paul got the boot from ever going to the White House again and this cartel tried their worst to smear Tom Tancredo to unelect him too.
One guy in a crapper tapping his foot is a bad deal in life..........numbers of conservatives being ushered out of government is something else going on.
I suggest that the patrician RINO's have jumped into the Rockefeller bedsack with the full intent of what is a coup in the GOP to get a Rudy or Mitt elected so all this globalist garbage ruining America will come about faster.
Something else has happened and it was planned. The people behind Fred Thompson were all set for George Allen who was Ron Paul and Tom Tancredo with Ronald Reagan tossed in. They brought him and these other Americans to ruin.
Researching more facts on this please will help alert voters that there is more to the Craig story than Democrats and the MSM........this came from the GOP RINO's as they could not have moved quicker in concert to destroy this man.
Thank you
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
Not to doubt you call for more facts, but
September 3, 2007 - 17:36 ET by mattmArlen Specter is a RINO and he is saying Craig should fight.
Either that's just a ruse to throw suspicion off the RINOs, or your theory is dubious.
From what I gather, the story came out when it did because that's the first time any official court action was released to the press - although I'm not sure about that...
I think LC has a point,
September 4, 2007 - 09:42 ET by dscottI think LC has a point, especially when you consider what happened to George Allen. Or the invasion of Cong. Weldon's house by the FBI under trumped up suspicions just before the election. This is the dirty politics of the Clinton's opposition research. I suppose everyone has a skeleton in their closet of some poor choice they made, but it is sure selective in the people choosen to be the object of this dirty game. I smells a Clinton in this as it is their style. They play a vicious game of power politics.
I say it's time to put the shoe on the other foot, the Clinton's should be made to answer for their connections to P&G/PUR. When someone is extoling a product via their foundation website and is working with the UN for them to buy the product (PUR) at UN expense, the appearance of impropriety is seen. Where there is smoke, there is fire. As we have seen with the Hsu campaign contribution bundling case, the Clintons are very clever operators who know how to get others to do their dirty work and profit from it. Does anyone really think Hsu and others did this simply on their own? The ideas to circumvent the FEC rules came from somewhere and the funneled money did as well. That source is likely to be the Clintons, they are both lawyers after all, well versed in the art of manipulation. When someone claims sex isn't sex unless it's intercourse and parses the definition of the word "is", we are dealing with people who don't operate on the same levels of morality and honor as understood by the general public. Such people believe the ends justifies the means, which makes them very dangerous people, they have no business being in any leadership position.
dscott's postulate: The degree to which someone exaggerates or deceives is inversely proportional to the merit of the advocated position.
Ben has a valid point, although he's angry at the wrong people
September 3, 2007 - 16:22 ET by c5thenThe issue is not IF Craig did anything wrong or IF he plead guilty just to end the fiasco and "make it go away". The issue is why and how this is comming out now 3 years after the incident and why the MSM are jumping all over it. It's all about the (R) after his name.
It's Ironic really...They yell and cry about a "vast right-wing conspiracy" and all the while being part of a vast left-wing conspiracy.
The day that "politician" became a career choice is the day we started losing the Republic
except i believe it was the
September 3, 2007 - 17:50 ET by TruthMongerexcept i believe it was the RNC that leaked this - to look tough on immorality just before the convention...
one problem: Craig wasn't being immoral
BTW GLBT lobby thanks for defending one of your alleged own...
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
Whether Craig is guilty or
September 4, 2007 - 10:09 ET by dscottWhether Craig is guilty or not I have no idea, I don't tend to believe anything reported by the MSM. It could be just another sleazy Dem dirty tricks operation like against Tom Delay or Newt G. While Foley was guilty of something, he wasn't guilty of what he was charged. It seems to be a tactic the Dems are playing, make an accusation and force the accused to prove them wrong in the court of public opinion. It is consistent with their methods of making an assertion which they expect everyone to accept as the truth until proven otherwise, fake but true. In other words, the benefit of the doubt is given to the accuser and the burden of proof to the accused. You should take note this is the same practice used by the Civil Courts (Family Law), this is where the Dems learned the strategy. The old Salem Witch trial strategy is very effective.
dscott's postulate: The degree to which someone exaggerates or deceives is inversely proportional to the merit of the advocated position.
Criminally Negligent Stupidity
September 3, 2007 - 20:11 ET by Junk Science SkepticExactly what part of "Anything you say can and will be used against you" is so hard for people to understand?
Rule # 1 for any involvement with law enforcement: Shut the hell up!
If people could understand this basic concept, the market for defense attorneys would drop by at least 50%.
I'm all for obeying the law and supporting law enforcement, but the only discussion you should have when an officer indicates you've broken the law is the following:
Granted, unless you've really screwed up and the police have an airtight case, you're likely to be released well before step #4 becomes necessary.
Forget about Craig's potentially creepy bathroom behavior, forget about the ethics or morality questions, forget about the apparent hypocrisy of the far right's perspective of what should be important to the RNC, . . .
. . . Craig should be bounced out of Congress for a monumental case of criminally negligent stupidity for not having the common sense to shut up and retain counsel at the appropriate time.
Thompson/Giuliani 2008
Here's a funny one junk science skeptic
September 3, 2007 - 21:41 ET by SportPolitics" Ed Gillespie, President Bush's counselor and a former chairman of the Republican Party, acknowledged that ethical scandals have hurt the GOP. He predicted that by 2008, the party "will not have candidates who have any kind of ethical considerations that will be a concern to the voters."
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/craig_republicans/2007/09/02/29289.html
I don't know about that, I consider every congressperson who overdrew their checking account in that big house and senate scandal a far bigger criminal than Craig, not to mention the criminal bribery pork racket.
So they are ALL guilty of much larger crimes, that of course will never be prosecuted, since they are quite frankly, above the law.
It's just like their inside trader information that they and their staff can use. They know when some drug or some technology or something or another is about to "go through" and be made legal - being congresscritters and their staffs. The law says they can act on that information in the markets, and they do - making twice as much as the top monety managers- consistently - over quite a long period.
So, it's all relative, I guess I have to give Gillespie some credit since he caveated with the phraseology " ethical considerations that will be a concern to the voters "..
I still think it's an idiotic wet dream anyway. Has he heard of the name Karl Rove, or Libyy, or Cheney, or Haliburton, or " the Iraq war" ... ?
I mean how STUPID does one have to be ?
Pretty damned stupid if you ask me.
" As a potential candidate, have you distanced yourself from the party of corruption ? Have you ever talked to Dick Cheney, or with the President or his advisers or cabinet members, do you support the war ? "
republican candidate answers " Yes, I'm an outsider with no ethical concerns for voters".
Don't get me wrong . . .
September 4, 2007 - 01:03 ET by Junk Science SkepticIf a "special prosecutor" was assigned to clean up Capitol Hill, we'd end up with about 400 or so of our legislators doing hard time for real crimes. So there's no argument from me regarding corruption on both sides of the aisle.
Craig and the officer would have needed to let the episode in the bathroom escalate another 2-3 steps before any provable crime could have occurred.
Since we've yet to outlaw stupidity, Craig didn't break any current laws. But again, those who make laws in Congress should have the sense to know how to deal with an officer who was obviously "bright" enough to earn the bathroom duty.
As for Gillespie, you're right, he's selling a wet dream there. The GOP needs to focus on the difference between how they and the Dems handle corruption (etc) once it's exposed. There are dozens of examples of the GOP booting out those who go astray, and conversely, dozens of Dems still in office after scandals.
You want to talk about corruption, take a look at what happens when we get a Dem majority:
http://www.nationalc...
http://www.pittsburg...
http://www.indystar....
Thompson/Giuliani 2008
Just Curious?
September 3, 2007 - 23:02 ET by well99What words did Craig used when he tried to solicit the cop?Was the officer in the right or left stall?He had to be in left to see the ring correct?
No words were spoken wel99 - as far as we know.
September 3, 2007 - 23:23 ET by SportPoliticsYes, NO WORDS.
Think about that.
However, Craig accuses the officer of soliciting him, now that may refer to the officer hitting the foot, or making googly faces at craig, we don't know, since the officer said " We aren't going to get into that".
However, we have been told by the police report, and given the very stern inference, that NO WORDS WERE SPOKEN.
What we are talking about here are "secret underground signals" that are "recognized by trained professionals"...like *tapping a shoe*, or *placing ones roller luggage in the only spot it fits *(a big a** clue we are told by the policeperp's report, since he has noticed it by experience... (in other words he's a lying idiotic FOOL - meaning no doubt he is by the overwhelming odds, a democrat )
Yeah man, I'm not making this stuff up - the cop did ! He knows placing the bag in the only spot it fits is a "sign of blocking the view for lewd behavior". ****'in eh. Glad pigboy edjumacated all of us homoless hicklets !
PS - Craig was on the left, the cop was to the right, so they argued over how the cop could have seen the left hand. Craig stopped the pig mid accusation and said " Now wait a minute, you were on my right, my left hand was to the opposite of where you were"....
Yeah, Craig busted the idiot pig in the interview. Pigboy got all excited about it, and screamed people could lean over, it's not that hard, and he sees it all the time... ( after pigboy remarked he's not stupid, and he knows what he's doing.) I'M NOT KIDDING GO LISTEN TO IT !
The little piglet freaked. He's not stupid, he knows what he's doing....LOL .. oh and yeah, he sees it all the time - people leaning over - when all he can see is an ankle or two - sees it all the time....everyday...
LOL
Wow. I'm telling you, we have some very, very stupid people around. The vast majority are a lot dumber than GWB.
Fear of MSM
September 3, 2007 - 23:33 ET by well99I think that was the problem.I dont support LC because of his stand on illegals.Bottom line is dont matter what party this stinks to all high heaven of BS.
I hear the conversation and the officer was unprofessional.That and the Idaho Statesmen has been investigateing him.Who are they besides a paper owned by carpetbaggers.It is alot of BS.Reid "forgot " about land he sold and the msm spent less time about that.Delay nailed it on the head.Two standards and it is garbage.
well99
September 4, 2007 - 02:49 ET by SportPoliticsTell me, how is it that piglet sees people leaning over everyday ? Is piglet on the ground with his face stuffed under the turlet door, watching for "cruisiers" ?
Or maybe piglet stands outside the closed stall doors and peers through the cracks, trying to spy some "gays lurking for hookups" ? LOL - Piglet perv out in front of the stalls, making sure he gets a good look at the men and little boys taking a dump, a good long look through the door jam... looking in so he can see the color - well not of their eyes.... gosh if piglet sees tapping toes when he's spying outside the stalls, it's fling the door open and BUST EM ! time...
So pig boy - that's all very interesting...
Unprofessional my ***, lying piglet
You citizen, when do it, it's a crime, I am doing it to check for perverts...yes I see plenting of innocent men and boys taking a dump - getting up, sitting down, flushing before they pull up their pants, but it's my job to keep an eye on them... "lots of em lean over, I see it everyday" ( as you're peering through the cracks, or as your head is stuffed under the divider, or do you jump up on the toilet seat and get a good overhead view ?)
rofl - Dude, I'm telling you...
THE PIG LIED
Sports, Gotta say I've
September 4, 2007 - 07:53 ET by LeonSports,
Gotta say I've never seen someone fight so hard for the innocence of man that pled guilty.
Keep up the good work! haha.
TM, I think your RNC
September 4, 2007 - 07:52 ET by LeonTM,
I think your RNC theory is interesting but I disagree with your rationale.
I don't think they leaked it to appear tough on immorality.
I think they leaked it to take away from the disgrace of the Gonzalez story. Craig took the fall so people would forget that our AG lied so many times he was forced to step down.
Classic Rovian diversionary tactics.
Rove done it! Hahaha!
September 4, 2007 - 08:33 ET by RJThe entire Craig episode was set up by the devious, evil genius, Karl. Hahaha!
Leon, I doubt very
September 4, 2007 - 10:00 ET by dscottLeon, I doubt very seriously that Rove was behind it. The fact that it is publicly known that everyone in the Administration was told if they didn't submit their resignation by Labor Day, they were committed to stay to January 2009. Everyone who was going to leave has left or submitted their resignation, from here on out, there will be no one else leaving until the next people take office. So your conspiracy theory is not reasonable on it's face. You forget that Repubs are far more organized in this manner than Dems.
The real question Leon is do you want Hillary to be POTUS and why? I suspect even you really don't want Hillary to be the Dem nominee. I think you recognize her to be a self obsessed opportunist as we do. I know the left despises her but is willing to hold their nose if necessary, but I submit you have better choices for your Party than Hillary. I will be so bold as to say that both the Right and the Left have a vested interest in seeing that Hillary not become the POTUS for our different reasons. You might want to consider that what the Repubs are doing now in distancing themselves from tainted candidates leaves the Dems in a problematic position of embracing their own dirt.
dscott's postulate: The degree to which someone exaggerates or deceives is inversely proportional to the merit of the advocated position.
I don't know if Craig is
September 4, 2007 - 15:07 ET by Chris NormanI don't know if Craig is guilty of solliciting or not. What I care about is this rush to resign we keep seeing on the Republican side. Unless, the problem makes it illegal for the member to serve in Congress, I think it should be up to the constituents to decide if their senator or representative continues to serve. Otherwise, we should just forget about holding elections and, instead, let the pollsters and pundits decide who serves in Congress ...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
So true. Rush said the same
September 4, 2007 - 15:39 ET by Conservative VoiceSo true. Rush said the same on his show today, and said something that I wished happened, because it would of been telling. What would the media's reaction be if Craig instead of resigning, changed himself to a Democrat?