Ethics panel says Craig acted improperly

Ethics panel says Craig acted improperly (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

Griswold -> Ethics panel says Craig acted improperly (2/13/2008 5:53:35 PM)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080214/ap_on_go_co/craig_ethics Hmmmm....let's see now..... Senator Craig went in to an airport bathroom and argued that he wasn't dipping for dick. Now...as the FBI reports indicate...the way it works is....if you're in stall A, and "boyfriend" is in stall B....you slap the hand of the dude in stall B (you being in stall A) and THEN....(this IS according to FBI reports)....you have to agree to move to stall C. Stall C, naturally being....not stall B...nor stall A. Stall C being of course...stalls other than the stall (he was) in....as well as the stall the other (FBI) dude was not in as well. Let's be clear...(he) had to move....from the stall (he was) in...to a stall not at all where (he was)....that being a stall not at all similar to the stall where (he) dropped trow. (Definitely not stall A). So....Mr Craig was dipping his hand into stall B...just to "say hello"...but as importantly...he packed his shit (sorry...had to go there) and went to stall C....(as did Mr FBI pooooty searching dude). And Mr Craig is now suggesting that...(while he moved, rather encumbered {briefcase, palm pilot, undies} to stall C) that he was simply telling the fellow "next door" that he was "moving his hand....entirely misinterpreted". I'm thinking Mr Craig wanted some poooty. (Just my thoughts).

Alumbrado -> RE: Ethics panel says Craig acted improperly (2/14/2008 12:17:52 AM)
I'm sorry..what were you saying? I couldn't get past the words 'Senate' and 'Ethics' side by side in the first line of the story...

Griswold -> RE: Ethics panel says Craig acted improperly (2/14/2008 5:05:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Alumbrado I'm sorry..what were you saying? I couldn't get past the words 'Senate' and 'Ethics' side by side in the first line of the story... Hahahahahahaha

Taboo4Two -> RE: Ethics panel says Craig acted improperly (2/14/2008 6:00:19 AM)
I particulary enjoyed his comment about how it was all just a misunderstanding because "I have a wide stance." Domino

pahunkboy -> RE: Ethics panel says Craig acted improperly (2/14/2008 6:44:20 AM)
I was thinking restrooms have become so controlled. Side by side stalls are now closed- so if 2 want a bm no deal. add driving and how roads now are designed for dumb people. this guy is the type that pushes gays into bathroom sex. guys like him make it possible, when it is better to commit to one partner. which is not celebrated in our culure. laws arent the total answere as it is cultural guns should have warning label. "dont insert into mouth when shooting" lick lick

ottRopesandKnots -> RE: Ethics panel says Craig acted improperly (2/14/2008 1:56:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Griswold Let's be clear...(he) had to move....from the stall (he was) in...to a stall not at all where (he was)....that being a stall not at all similar to the stall where (he) dropped trow. (Definitely not stall A). So....Mr Craig was dipping his hand into stall B...just to "say hello"...but as importantly...he packed his shit (sorry...had to go there) and went to stall C....(as did Mr FBI pooooty searching dude). I'm sorry, did I miss that part of the story somewhere along the line? I'm just as amused as the next guy that Senator Craig got busted, but I don't remember any of the reports I read mentioning moving to a different stall... just the brushing of the hand stuff.

Muttling -> RE: Ethics panel says Craig acted improperly (2/14/2008 2:01:37 PM)
I'm a little confused here. When does pole B get inserted in the slot A and does it happen before or after insertion into orafice M? quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy guns should have warning label. "dont insert into mouth when shooting" Reminded me of a good photo.. http://ground-state.blogspot.com/2007/01/redneck-hearing-protection.html

Owner59 -> RE: Ethics panel says Craig acted improperly (2/14/2008 2:25:26 PM)
"In a letter to the Republican senator, the ethics panel said Craig's attempt to withdraw his guilty plea after his arrest at a Minneapolis airport was an effort to evade legal consequences of his own actions. Craig's actions constitute "improper conduct which has reflected discreditably on the Senate," the letter said" ~~~~~~~~~~ I`m having a problem with this.He is essentially is being cited for putting up a vigorous defense.WTH is wrong with that? If he had just taken it in the neck(no punn there),he`d be ok with the Senate.Is that what this is? I have no love for republicans,but this doesn`t seem fair on the face of it.

Griswold -> RE: Ethics panel says Craig acted improperly (2/14/2008 5:38:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ottRopesandKnots quote: ORIGINAL: Griswold Let's be clear...(he) had to move....from the stall (he was) in...to a stall not at all where (he was)....that being a stall not at all similar to the stall where (he) dropped trow. (Definitely not stall A). So....Mr Craig was dipping his hand into stall B...just to "say hello"...but as importantly...he packed his shit (sorry...had to go there) and went to stall C....(as did Mr FBI pooooty searching dude). I'm sorry, did I miss that part of the story somewhere along the line? I'm just as amused as the next guy that Senator Craig got busted, but I don't remember any of the reports I read mentioning moving to a different stall... just the brushing of the hand stuff. Yepper...you did miss that part of the story. (It's okay though...the police didn't miss that part).

RedMagic1 -> RE: Ethics panel says Craig acted improperly (2/14/2008 5:43:54 PM)
Larry Craig is completely heterosexual. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GIsLFjWCTsk

Gwynvyd -> RE: Ethics panel says Craig acted improperly (2/14/2008 5:58:24 PM)
Great song! oh and dont forget: The panel also said Craig should have received permission from the ethics panel before using campaign funds to pay his legal bills. Craig, who is not running for re-election, has spent more than $213,000 in campaign money for legal expense and public relations work in the wake of his arrest and conviction last summer. The committee said it had reached no conclusion about whether use of campaign funds was proper, but it said "it is clear that you never sought the committee's approval, as required," to use the money for legal expenses. Any future use of campaign money for legal bills will be seen as "demonstrating your continuing disregard of ethics requirements," the ethics committee wrote in its three-page letter. That is just wrong..... Gwyn

RedMagic1 -> RE: Ethics panel says Craig acted improperly (2/14/2008 6:11:06 PM)
Take a look at "Defenders of Marriage" by the same guy.

ottRopesandKnots -> RE: Ethics panel says Craig acted improperly (2/15/2008 8:13:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Griswold quote: ORIGINAL: Ottropesandknots I'm sorry, did I miss that part of the story somewhere along the line? I'm just as amused as the next guy that Senator Craig got busted, but I don't remember any of the reports I read mentioning moving to a different stall... just the brushing of the hand stuff. Yepper...you did miss that part of the story. (It's okay though...the police didn't miss that part). lol I guess I should have been more explicit... Got a link to a news item or police report with those tidbits I missed? I've done a bit of hunting and can't find an account of those details. I hate it when portions of things I've read slip off into the 'dead cell' area of my brain.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.625