href="http://www.idahostatesman.com/1264/story/144280.html">paraphrased: I'm sorry that I accidentally pled guilty to a crime I didn't commit because a newspaper asked me a bunch of questions.

"Please let me apologize to my family friends and staff, and fellow Idahoans, for the cloud placed over Idaho," he said. "I did nothing wrong and I regret the decision to plead guilty and the sadness that decision has brought on my family, friends, staff and fellow Idahoans, and for that I apologize.

Craig said he overreacted after the June arrest, in a men's room in the Minneapolis airport. "I chose to plead guilty to a lesser charge in hopes of making it go away," he said. Not seeking counsel was "a mistake and I deeply regret it."

Craig said his state of mind was troubled then because of the Idaho Statesman investigation into rumors circulated by a blogger and published by many other papers in the state.

He said he and his family "have been relentlessly and viciously harassed by the Idaho Statesman."

This is, for the record, a totally useless apology. What he's apologizing for is not what he's getting flak for from the press. For more on political apologies see my piece
from July.

You could, of course, argue that Craig has done nothing illegal as Scott
and href="http://thegarance.com/archives/670">Garance have done.
Craig is denying he was trying to solicit sex and it's possible he was in earnest and, if he sticks to that position, he theoretically shouldn't apologize at all.
Still, his statement took the form of an apology and as such it was terrible.

A side note: while most people agree that Craig would have been violating the law had he actually had sex in a bathroom stall Garance points out the important (and fantastically named) Limberhand precedent which overturned the conviction of a man caught masturbating in a stall in a public restroom.

--Sam Boyd