General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFederal Election Commission Say Ex-Senator Larry Craig Needs To Narrow His Stance
SFGate
JOHN MILLER, Associated Press
Updated 7:32 p.m., Friday, August 3, 2012
[font color=gray]FILE - In this March 6, 2012 file photo, former Idaho Sen. Larry Craig, center, chats
with state representative Marv Hagadorn, left, with Rep. Raul Labrador, right, and
his wife Rebecca at the Ada County Republicans caucus on the campus of Boise State
University in Boise, Idaho. MANDATORY CREDIT Photo: The Idaho Statesman, Joe
Jaszewski / AP[/font]
BOISE, Idaho (AP) Former Republican U.S. Sen. Larry Craig aims to fend off a federal election lawsuit against him by arguing his infamous June 11, 2007, Minneapolis airport bathroom visit that ended in his sex-sting arrest was part of his official Senate business. Craig is hoping to avoid repaying $217,000 in campaign funds the Federal Election Commission claims he misused to defend himself.
The FEC sued Craig in June in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., alleging he converted the campaign money to personal use by spending it on his legal defense after he was accused of soliciting sex in a Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport bathroom. The commission argues Craig's defense had no connection to his campaign for federal office.
Craig counters that money tied to his airport bathroom trip was for neither personal use nor his campaign, but fell under his official, reimbursable duties as senator because he was traveling between Idaho and the nation's capital for work. He cites a U.S. Senate rule in which reimbursable per diem expenses include all charges for meals, lodging, hotel fans, cleaning, pressing of clothing and bathrooms.
"Not only was the trip itself constitutionally required, but Senate rules sanction reimbursement for any cost relating to a senator's use of a bathroom while on official travel," wrote Andrew Herman, Craig's lawyer in Washington, D.C., in documents filed Thursday.
MORE
- Hmmm, so is he saying he can pay his oral sex-sting lawyer's fees under the meals per diem? Got any proof Senator? A menu??
- ''Sending good people in to reform a state is like sending virgins to reform a whorehouse.'' ~Anonymous
Tribetime
(4,702 posts)as seen on countdown with Keith
Yeah Its Spin
(236 posts)Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)Sometimes the jokes just write themselves.
BOISE, Idaho (AP) Former Republican U.S. Sen. Larry Craig aims to fend off a federal election lawsuit against him by arguing his infamous June 11, 2007, Minneapolis airport bathroom visit that ended in his sex-sting arrest was part of his official Senate business. Craig is hoping to avoid repaying $217,000 in campaign funds the Federal Election Commission claims he misused to defend himself.
The FEC sued Craig in June in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., alleging he converted the campaign money to personal use by spending it on his legal defense after he was accused of soliciting sex in a Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport bathroom. The commission argues Craig's defense had no connection to his campaign for federal office.
Craig counters that money tied to his airport bathroom trip was for neither personal use nor his campaign, but fell under his official, reimbursable duties as senator because he was traveling between Idaho and the nation's capital for work. He cites a U.S. Senate rule in which reimbursable per diem expenses include all charges for meals, lodging, hotel fans, cleaning, pressing of clothing and bathrooms.
"Not only was the trip itself constitutionally required, but Senate rules sanction reimbursement for any cost relating to a senator's use of a bathroom while on official travel," wrote Andrew Herman, Craig's lawyer in Washington, D.C., in documents filed Thursday.
6000eliot
(5,643 posts)In what universe?
Zambero
(8,965 posts)That him standing and smiling to the right of Craig. As a so-called "deficit hawk" and "family values" conservative, one might wonder whether Labrador is OK with Craig's plan for retroactively financing his botched sex solicitatioan, along with its legal consequences.