OH-18: Jeanette Moll attacks the Ohio ACLU over an argument it never made...

(HT: Weapons of Mass Discussion, Plunderbund, and Ohio River Valley Politics)

GOP candidate, Magistrate Jeanatte Moll, in an act of shameless gay bashing and civil liberties demogogery, is trying to make a campaign issue of the fact that the national ACLU filed a brief in support of disgraced Larry Craig (R-ID)'s appeal.  In a sad attempt to try to justify a local angle on this issue, Moll is demanded that the Ohio ACLU either denounce the brief it never filed or its board of directors should resign.

The ACLU argued that even if Craig was inviting the officer to have sex, his actions wouldn't be illegal.

"The government cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Senator Craig was inviting the undercover officer to engage in anything other than sexual intimacy that would not have called attention to itself in a closed stall in the public restroom," the ACLU wrote in its brief.

Of course, in the haste of her own grandstanding blasting the ACLU, she apparently never bothered to actually read the brief she objects to.  Had she, perhaps she would have noticed that all the ACLU did was cite binding Minnesota Supreme Court precedent that held that a closed bathroom stall, such as Craig's, is a private location with a reasonable expectation of privacy from intrusion by law enforcement.

But Moll's gay baiting and bashing of a civil liberties advocacy organization over arguments it never made (and in fact, the national ACLU never made) raises an interesting question if she applied her standard to herself.

Should she not denounce the following legal arguments raised by the titular head of her party or resign her party affiliation?

• That waterboarding is not torture?
• That a President has a constitutional right to circumvent limitations placed on Executive power laid forth in legislation signed by the President by merely signing a statement claiming his signature of that legislation does not bind him to those provisions, instead of vetoing that legislation over those provisions as required under the Constitution?
• That the Executive branch does not need to seek Congressional approval for a long-term, and in fact, permanent American military commitment in Iraq?
• That the Executive branch has the authority to arrest individuals and hold them in custody without providing them with any trial or access to judicial review to challenge the basis the government detains that individual?
• That under the guise of national security, the Executive branch has the right to mine domestic telephone calls involving U.S. citizens without warrants, including warrants granted from the FISA court?
• That the Vice-President is not part of the Executive or legislative branch and therefore, not subject to federal FOIA laws and executive record keeping preservation?

Any others that Jeanett Moll should either denounce or resign her membership in the Republican Party?