1) True allegation, irrespective of timing.

2) The 3rd party candidate benefits all around in this, as I’ve already said in another thread.
That’s is as credible a source as Franken’s campaign. Probably MORE so. Rather like the Grunseth - Carlson thing.
I notice Norm clearly pointed to Franken & no one else. How convenient that he try to pin it on the closest challenger.

I am most of all inclined to suspect the accusation is simply true, or a shaded truth.
That Norm had money funneled to him. Looking at the other associations of the players around Coleman - its not so out of character.

Barring those options…
3) Has Norm ever MET the person filing the suit? It might be a beef someone has with Norm, who has nothing to do with either campaign! What might such a beef be? If we can’t answer that - then its really not viable to think so.

In the 3rd debate tonight Normy tried to nuance this story:
Its because Franken didn’t cry for Norm & hug him - as reason enough to attack Franken!?

But this is dancing in place. We don’t know.
Its a serious allegation. Possible criminal wrongdoing.

And Norm is trying to play it for sympathy.

(whups on the typos - I need a new keyboard!)

As we learned from Swiftboating of Kerry, and even in McCain having been attacked by
Bush or Bush surrogates in 2000 with the race-baiting “black child” reference: you do not leave an accusation unanswered.
And you DO NOT HESITATE.

Is that necessarily playing defense? To be prompt in answering allegations?
Is that too nuanced? I agree it could become a defensive posture, but I don’t believe it has done so.

And Craig H is correct too. It was obscene the way Norm behaved after getting Paul Wellstone’s seat.
Now he’s selling us how flip-floppy “go-with-the-flow” he can be after he’s been less than cooperative.

Is Norm as bad as all that? I’m not sure he’s talented enough to be.
And I clean break would be a great way to approach a TRULY new way of looking at the future, instead of
repeating the mistakes of the past.

I think it would be wise to watch tonight’s debate.

Franken dropped campaign appearances to attend a press conference where he defended himself and and his campaign.

I agree the case is real. I agree that it is most likely that Coleman’s supporter sent the 75K. I agree it is likely that Norm’s wife got the money like the docoments show. I would not be surprised to find out that someone from Coleman’s campaign gave an early notice to the now conservative Strib.

Never the less Norm has spun this event so that the media is reporting it as a battle of dirty tricks, not evidence of Norm’s corruption. Norm’s spin is working.

Mr. Kazeminy seems to have gone to ground.
My guess is that Senator Coleman
is communicating with him (not directly, but
through attorneys). Senator Coleman has not called
on Mr. Kazeminy to speak and, given the gravity
of the allegations, it is unlikely that either
Senator Coleman or Mr. Kazeminy’s attorney want
him to speak.

Franken has run a clean campaign to date. Why would he jeopardize that?
It makes no sense for Franken to run anything underhanded when he’s tied for the seat.

It doesn’t sound at all like Al. I think its more likely to believe:

a) Irrespective of timing, the case is REAL.

b) That its like Karl Rove bugging his own office 8 years ago.
Why else would Nor not deny it & want it investigated?

If there were dirty tricks - whre have they come from before this - the Right Wing.
Where is it most logical to think this is coming from: The Right Wing IFFFFFF its not true.
and that’s a big IFFF!!!!!