Coleman Lawyers Up In FBI Probe

The Minneapolis Star-Tribune reports that Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman is getting some help with his FBI investigation:

Four of Minnesota's biggest legal guns have cast their shadows over two lawsuits that have drawn the attention of the FBI.

They have been retained by U.S. Sen. Norm Coleman; his wife, Laurie; Jim Hays, her insurance company employer; and Nasser Kazeminy, a multi-millionaire friend of the Colemans who is accused in the lawsuits of sending them money in 2007 through Hays' company. Coleman's Senate ethics form reports no such payment.

Three of the lawyers are former assistant U.S. attorneys who have prosecuted white-collar criminal cases. The fourth attorney has a reputation among prosecutors, defense colleagues and judges for thoroughness and aggressiveness wrapped in a civil demeanor.

Read more about the Coleman investigation. On Tuesday, the state canvassing board will meet to review all challenged ballots from Coleman's recount battle against Democrat Al Franken. Franken's campaign has called Coleman's attempts to stop the counting of certain absentee ballots "cynical and desperate."

Comments

[CR46]

Hie spokesperon has announced he will pay for his lawyers with his campaign fund!!

[daedelus]

Michele Bachmann needs to put her wig back on. She's scaring me.

[rockyb26]

his dentist/or­thodontist­/oral surgeon should be brought up on charges as well.

[milo h minderbinder]

Resolving the challenged ballots started today.

The MN paper has a page with updated totals, not many done yet but it looks like the vast majority of challenges will be rejected (which is what Franken's people had predicted).

Their projection currently has it ending with Franken up by 158.

http://senaterecount.startribune.com/ballots/

[Okieborn]

Oh Well !!!
So What else is New !!!

[jsgaetano]

"Republican Ethics". The culture of corruption just keeps on keeping on.

[haval2]

yeah, that's what we need more of...thugs that have to get lawyers to clear the way so they may serve in washington­...great..­.bush administration Part 2.

[Politisizer]

Four Lawyers and a Political Funeral...

Sounds familiar

[NMDEM61]

Very, very clever

[CR46]

I wonder who is paying for these lawyers? Sen Coleman has stated he is in financial straits.

[MNmommy]

Nasser Kazeminy, of course.

[echota]

Man has that Coleman got some big teeth. I mean, wow! I can't stop staring at them.

[MichiganJFrog]

Mr. Ed is jealous of him.

[tonewheel]

Heeeeello Wilbur!

[LeeCalif]

They needed a job and Coalman needed Four lawyers.

[skeetchamp]

Criminals always rush to hide behind expensive lawyers.
MINNESOTA NEEDS A SPECIAL ELECTION.

[milo h minderbinder]

Nah, the counting will be done soon, maybe even by the end of the week.

If they wanted special elections, they would have included them in their election law.

[motoGpifupleez]

'Just because I got a team of lawyers does not mean I fear my actions are criminal, it's just a reflex, that's all".

[cgran]

The race is a win/win for Democrats, or a win/lose for Coleman. If he wins, the Senate investigation will go forward. If he loses, the investigation will likely fade into the sunset, and the seat will go Democratic. As one Senator said, "The best thing that could happen to Norm Coleman is to lose his recount." How can you argue with a statement like that?

[dawlishgal]

MN has a Republican governor, so if Coleman wins and gets tossed out (as he well deserves to be), Pawlenty would like as not name a Republican to fill the slot. Years ago, when Mondale was chosen as VP, the then- governor Wendell Anderson (the hockey player) appointed himself, and that was pretty much the end of his political career. Minnesotans used to have less tolerance for political hijinks than they seem to have now (what with Michelle Bachmann, the Coleman biz, and Jesse Ventura).

[Durango]

The senate has the last say on who gets seated.

And they could demand a revote.

Or rather, remand it back to the state for a revote.

[deke4]

One wonders why dear Norm did not go directly to the US Supreme Court to stop the vote?
It still puzzles me how the Supreme Court could stop the Florida 2000 recount. Conducting elections and determining the outcome of elections is reserved for each individual state. The Constitution stated that "any power not EXPRESSLY given to the federal government was reserved to the states. Nowhere in the Constitution does the Federal government have the power to determine the qualifications for voting nor have the power to determine the outcome of elections.

It seems Florida was following established Florida law when recounting began, yet the Supreme Court stopped that count. They were so ashamed of their action in that Bush v Gore that they added a codicil to their decision. That codicil said this ruling applied to this case ONLY. Apparently they were afraid to set a precedent that might not work so favorably for them next time.

[AtomicMan]

I think they decided to take the Gore v Bush recount to the US Supreme Court because of the national implications of a presidential election. State Senate recounts like the Coleman v Smalley one in Minnesota should be handled in the states first - wouldn't be surprised if this one goes to the US Senate and/or US Supreme Court. If most estimates are correct, Smalley will win by just a handful of votes - it's very strange, if this is the case, because basically his family (including himself, wife, and two children pushed him over the edge to victory). Possibly the closest election in US history.