OK, here’s the thing: We think District Court Judge Donald Mosley did the right thing in dismissing two of the charges against former Clark County Commissioner Lynette Boggs.

We know, we know: Everybody hates Boggs, the one-time Democrat who turned Republican and accepted a seat on the Station Casinos board before finally being done in by union wrath, when a private investigator caught her allegedly living at a home outside her district.

But Boggs wasn’t just charged with a felony for signing a statement that swore she lived inside her district; she was also indicted for paying her nanny with campaign funds and claiming it as a "special event" on her campaign finance forms. (She was getting divorced at the time, and had to campaign for re-election.)

Now, let’s make something perfectly clear: You cannot charge expenses to your campaign account that you would normally incur in the course of your life. That would be considered "personal use," and the law specifically bans spending campaign funds for personal use. For example, you can’t pay your mortgage with those funds, since you’d have to pay your mortgage whether you were running for office or not. You can’t buy new clothes with the money, since you would need to buy clothes no matter what. 

But check it: Boggs says she needed a nanny because she was off campaigning. Now, she may have needed a nanny no matter what, and thus should have paid out of her own pocket. (That’s no doubt a good idea for all candidates in the future.) But it’s also arguable that the babysitting was needed only because Boggs was campaigning. If so, it’s arguable that she honestly believed paying the nanny was a legitimate campaign expense. In proof: She took no pains to hide the expense, and openly reported it.

"I don’t think it’s been shown that there was a willful desire on the part of the defendant to mislead," Mosley said. Consequently, he dismissed one count of perjury (campaign finance documents are signed under penalty of perjury) and one count of filing a false document.

Now, having said that, it seems perfectly clear to us that the remaining two perjury counts and one filing a false document count with respect to her residence are going to stick. There’s plenty of precedent about what constitutes a person’s residence, and the evidence against Boggs there seems ironclad. Trial starts March 31 for those charges.

But nanny-gate? A good argument could be made that Boggs was overcharged on that one.

It’s another manic Monday, and that means it’s time for some Quick Hits. Honestly, we wish it was Sunday. Why, you ask? Well, because that’s our fun day. Our day when we don’t have to, you know, run.

• OK, this one’s pretty complicated. Apparently, there’s a guy by the name of Ruben Kiuhen. And he’s, like, an assemblyman, or something. He may, or may not, have been elected with the strong help of the Culinary. (We think may.) And he later bucked the Culinary by endorsing Hillary Clinton for office. And the Culinary may be mad at him. And he may be making it worse by refusing to apologize. And now an anonymous source tells the Las Vegas Sun that Kiuhen is never going to eat lunch in this town again.
  
• There are generally two types of journalists. Those who, for whatever reason, go easy on sources without asking tough questions, and those who kick ass. Even on the very same subject!
  
• Another reason the Review-Journal is a fun newspaper to read: U.S. Rep. Jon Porter says John McCain is a better choice for president than either Democrat running for office. Why? "They are proposing the largest tax increase in history, they want to retreat from the war and they want socialized medicine."
  
• Then, on the very next page, we learn that Merck & Co. has agreed to pay $674 million to settle a claim that it overcharged the government for four drugs — and bribed doctors to prescribe them — including Vioxx, which was linked to heart attacks and strokes before being pulled from the market.
  
• Because, yeah, for-profit medicine is working oh-so-well, isn’t it, congressman?
  
• C’mon, people. Woody Allen is a great director, but he’s not supposed to be a role model!
  
• If there’s one thing better than stealing room tax dollars from the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority, it’s not paying taxes at all! You’ve got to hand it to the anti-tax conservatives at Las Vegas Sands Corp.: They really do practice what they preach.
  
• Despite the Las Vegas Sun’s rather generous appraisal of U.S. Sen. Harry Reid’s handling of the recent stimulus bill (actual result: Reid seems to have had his ass handed to him on a velvet pillow), we’re struck by one thing: U.S. Sen. John Ensign still voted no. Prick.
  
• Amen, brother.