Former Republican Senator Larry Craig, forced to resign after getting caught in a sex sting in the bathroom of the Minneapolis airport, is trying to dodge $217,000 in restitution the Federal Election Commission is demanding, saying his bathroom encounter was official Senate business.
The FEC contends Craig, who famously claimed to have a 'wide stance,' misused $217,000 in campaign money to defend himself when he was accused of soliticing sex in Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. Craig claims the use of the bathroom, and all costs associated with, are reimbursable under Senate rules.
The Star Tribune quotes Andrew Herman, Craig's DC Lawyer in saying "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."
Apparently the party of fiscal responsibility wants the taxpayer to pick up the tab for arrests related to cruising in public restrooms. The only question seems to be, which Republican donor or PAC is going to put up the money to make this story go away?
Put him in a cell with Sandusky and throw away the key.
8/5/2012 10:53:18 AM
Larry Craig - conservative values in action. Trolling restrooms is finding love in all the wrong places. Still in a state of denial.
There is a huge difference between being a pervert and being gay.
Trolling restrooms is a perverted and selfish act.
The only thing that Larry loves is himself. He was just looking for an outlet for his momemtary pleasures. Just like any other republican... the outlet is always expendable.
Bob Bobonde, Minto ND.
8/4/2012 7:22:59 PM
Any restroom republicans here reading Ed's blogs? and if I need to use a restroom, it's nice to get one with stalls that go all the way to the floor in case there's a republican in the next one!
8/4/2012 4:17:57 PM
This means if I have to pay at a pay toilet I can deduct it off my income tax as going to the bathroom is an expense I dont have to pay at home.. These clowns will do anything to keep their greedy money. He is most likely spending more in legal fees that the money he owes and guess he wants the tax payer to pay that also..