Dave Kurtz has a very interesting post up at TPM asking exactly what Senator Craig did wrong.

We’ve had lots of back and forth discussion here internally about what conduct by Sen. Craig in that Minneapolis airport restroom was actually illegal. We’ve posted the arrest report, so take a look and reach your own conclusions.

Leering stares, foot tapping, a lingering presence. Are any of those, even taken together, what most reasonable people would call criminal? Is it because they happened in a bathroom? God knows they happen every night in bars and other public spaces, among gays and straights.

Please take a moment and read the entire post. I have been trying to wrap my brain around this very question.

The charges do seem very far fetched, and I highly doubt they would have stuck if Senator Craig would have decided to fight them. The problem is he knew what he was planning on doing and in turn pleaded to the charges. I got a funny feeling this decision was made by him in hopes of saving public embarrassment, a plan that did not pan out how he wanted.

So a man soliciting sex from another man in a restroom is worthy of a sting operation. Does the same apply if a man solicits sex from a woman, or vice a versa? It appears that this case really exposes the hypocrisy of our legal system and those charged with enforcing it.

This makes me think more of the To Catch A Predator series on NBC. We see people getting arrested on national television who are supposed to be soliciting sex from minors. The problem is that they really aren’t committing crimes, instead they are “thinking about it”. Some states do have laws that you can not engage in sexual discussion with a minor online, but in a world of cyber anonymity, how does one know who they are really talking to? Chat services such as Yahoo stand strong behind their privacy agreements, and that opens up the possibility of someone engaging in some dirty talk with a person who says they are 18, but in fact are only 13.

Last year we saw one of these cases unravel in the national spotlight. Mark Foley was a member of the U.S. Congress and engaged in sexual discussion online with minors. The problem is that Mark Foley may not even face charges for what he did. He engaged in the exact same behavior that some of the people arrested on To Catch A Predator did, and those people are sentenced for their crimes.

I agree that there should be different levels of punishment for common citizens and members of our government, but I don’t think the current standards should apply. Instead when a member of Senate or Congress gets convicted of a crime, they should face stiffer penalties. They not only committed a crime against their victim, but also committed a crime against the people they represent. Our leaders are supposed to lead, and by that I mean by example. That must be considered in all sentencing.

So perhaps Senator Craig did deserve getting busted, as he should lead by a higher standard than most (a standard which he actually campaigned on), but the same must now face Mark Foley. Claiming that investigators can not look at Congressional computers due to privacy concerns can not be the reason to halt justice. In this new world that George Bush has created of extreme executive privilege and secrecy for those of power, we need to re-examine if this is what our country stands for. If a crime is suspected then there should be no denying investigators access to possible data if they can obtain a legal warrant. This includes the administrative and executive branch.

Of course this is also a product of our national system of justice and the fact that it all lies under the executive branch. Perhaps it is time to look at how much we cherish living in a country where we are supposed to have a balanced system of justice and perhaps divide the enforcement of that justice more equally amongst all three branches.