This is NOT an "11th Hour" Story

As much as Senator Coleman would like you to believe the recent allegations concerning potentially illegal payments funneled to his wife are “a vicious 11th hour attack”, the record simply does not bear that out. Questions regarding Senator Coleman’s complicated financial arrangements with financial backers go back at least to June, when Edward Pound of the National Journal first broke the story of Coleman’s unusual rental arrangements.

From that story:

Earlier this month, after National Journal questioned Coleman and Larson about the living arrangement, the senator said he discovered that his rent for last November and January had not been paid. In mid-June, Coleman covered the back rent with a personal check for $1,200 made out to Larson and signed by the senator’s wife. Last year, Coleman sold furniture to Larson to cover one month’s rent, according to Larson. And Larson held on to yet another month’s rent check for three months, cashing it a few days after NJ’s inquiries.(National Journal)

After this story broke, Senator Coleman produced a “lease” for the rental premises, dated after details of the “between friends” – Norm Coleman and Jeff Larson of FLS fame – agreement became known.

Sill unanswered after these revelations are the arrangements concerning utilities for the Senator’s rental unit. What is known is the unit Coleman rents is a legally licensed separate rental unit, with separated utility meters. On August 4th, at a press conference, Coleman spokesperson Mark Drake promised to check with the campaign about allowing members of the media to see an actual utility bill, so members of the media could verify Senator Coleman was paying what he should be and not violating the Gift Ban – let alone having a corporation picking up his tab.

To date, said utility bills have not been produced. Indeed, just yesterday, with Mark Drake at the podium, Team Coleman stonewalled reporters again. Here’s the transcript, beginning at the 15:24 mark:

REPORTER: Mark we know that Senator Coleman pays $600 a month in rent, right?

Mark Drake: (right.)

REPORTER: We still don’t haven’t had an answer on utility bills, and we asked a few months ago if you could produce those to see how much he’s really paying – do you have an answer for us now?

Mark Drake: You know, this has all been dealt with months ago.

REPORTER: No, it hasn’t been. We haven’t seen a utility bill yet and it would be good to see those.

Mark Drake: OK, I’ll see what I can do.

REPORTER: We should have seen them by now.

Mark Drake: OK. (The Uptake)

Keep that in mind, regarding the utility bill issue. Now, let’s look at a press conference from October 8th, where both the utility bill and Lori Coleman’s employment were brought up:

REPORTER: On a different subject is there a reason that the Senator won’t say whether or not someone else bought some suits for him.

CULLEN SHEEHAN: Rachel, the Senator has reported every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: That wasn’t my question, Cullen.

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has reported every gift he has ever received. We are not going to respond to unnamed sources on a blog.

REPORTER: So Senator Coleman’s friend has not bought these suits for him? Is that correct?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has reported every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: Why would say that? Why wouldn’t you give us an answer yes or no on that?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has recorded every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: We haven’t asked whether he has recorded every gift he has ever received and I will take his word that he has recorded every gift he has received. Has he ever received a gift of suits?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has reported every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: If the answer is no, then why don’t you say no.

CULLEN SHEEHAN: He has reported every gift he has ever received, Rachel.

TwoPuttTommy: Cullen, who’s name is on Senator Coleman’s utility bill in D.C.?”

CULLEN SHEEHAN: Are there any more questions from the Capital Press Corps?

REPORTER: What about Laurie, Mrs. Coleman’s job at Hays Company? Do you know what she did there?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: Again they have disclosed everything they need to disclose on the Senate ethics forms.

REPORTER: So the Senator will only go according to the Senate ethics laws or rules rather than answer questions?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: He has done everything that he is required to do, Rachel.

REPORTER: That is not my question, Cullen.

CULLEN SHEEHAN: But that is my response.

REPORTER: Senator Coleman has talked a lot about campaign finance and transparency. He’ll repeat that transparency – transparency – that’s what you need to have. If there are questions about whether he was a recipient of some very expensive suits and whether those they were gifted to him in an appropriate way – why not just clear it all up because it is very unclear to us?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: He does that every year as a United States Senator on his Senate disclosure forms.

REPORTER: And will we find information about clothing on those forms?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: If it exceeds a gift limit, yes.

REPORTER: So is it possible that he received these suits and it was below gift level.

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has reported every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: It is a little puzzling Cullen why you won’t say whether or not he received these gifts and I understand that you don’t have respond to everything on the blogs but you are getting questions from reporters and I don’t see why you aren’t answering them. Can you explain that a little to me?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: Rachel, we are not going to respond to unnamed sources on blogs. That is what we are going to do from now until election is over. The Senator has disclosed everything that he is required to disclose and recorded everything that he is required to record.

REPORTER: But Cullen if the Senator did nothing wrong here and that is what you are saying then just tell us that and the issue will go away.

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has reported every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: Did the Senator done something wrong here?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: The Senator has done nothing wrong and reported every gift he has ever received.

REPORTER: And you don’t know what Mrs. Coleman did for Hays Companies?

CULLEN SHEEHAN: And again whatever has been required to be disclosed about her income and what she does has been disclosed.

Apparently, by the recent cour filings, everything that has been required to be disclosed about ‘her” – Lori Coleman – has NOT been disclosed.

And clearly, the revelations alleged in the Texas court filings are NOT “a vicious 11th hour attack”; they are issues the Coleman campaign could have/should have gotten in front of, if the allegations were baseless, months ago. But they didn’t. Where there’s smoke, there’s often fire. Especially when left smoldering.

This story is not “an 11th hour attack” – this is a story that, after 4 months is coming to a boil; it very well could be embers combusting into fire. If it’s “11th hour”, that’s only because allegations have gone unsatisfactorily addressed – for months if not more.

And still unanswered is who’s name is on the utility bill for the apartment Norm Coleman rents, from a well-connected campaign operative. This is another story that Team Coleman has left unexplained – and after many months, those paying attention are connecting the dots.

(originally published at MnProgressiveProject.com)

T Minus 83 – George Bush and Erik Paulsen, Planet Denial Denizens

“We’re never been stay the course, George.” — George W. Bush, attempting to distance himself from what has been his core strategy in Iraq for the last three years, interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, October 22nd, 2006

I picked this Bushism for a very special reason. Just as Boy Blunder tried to distance himself from who he is and what he believes, “right” here in Minnesota’s 3rd Congressional District there’s a Republican candidate for Congress that’s tried to pull the same stuff concerning who he is, what he’s done, and what he believes – Erik Paulsen.

Let’s go back, and look at what part of what I wrote concerning Erik Paulsen’s campaign announcement, in January:

At his announcement, Erik Paulsen claimed to have, and I quote from his press release: “…years of working in bipartisan fashion, across the aisle, to get results in the business world and in the Minnesota legislature.”

Yeah, “right.” Anyone even slightly paying attention understands Erik Paulsen did not rise to Republican state House leadership position by being “bi-partisan.”

Right out of the box, Paulsen forces the interested citizen to question his credibility.

The very first line of the press release says, and again I quote: “Saying ‘Congress is broken, I will work to fix it,’ Erik Paulsen….”

Just who does Erik Paulsen think he’s kidding?

Jim Ramstad tried to fix it, and for that he was rewarded by GOP Leadership with backbench status.

If Jim Ramstad couldn’t fix it, what reasonable person could possibly believe Erik Paulsen could?

Newt Gingrich’s “Contract With America” fundamentally changed how power is structured in the Republican Party, in Congress.

Serious academics can explain exactly how power was removed from committees and placed in party leadership, leading to things such as the strong-armed ouster of Gingrich and the installation of Dennis Hastert as Speaker, with Tom DeLay the muscle. Not to mention the Abramoff Scandal, the K-Street Project, etc etc etc.

To the layman, the following explains it clearly: when it comes to Republican Congressmen, “the people elect them, but the GOP Leadership directs them.”

Paulsen’s claim he’s going to “work to fix it” is simply not credible.

Like Erik Paulsen is really – as a freshman congressman – going to take on and challenge John Boehner and Roy Blunt’s power and authority?

Quite frankly, in a one page press release, Paulsen seems to have a knack of saying things that simply don’t ring true.

Consider this: “Failed ideas and yearning for the past stand in the way of change. So do the politics of blame, division and partisan spin. Minnesotans are weary of this brand of politics.” (emphasis added).

Say, Erik?

THAT’S YOUR PARTY YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT.(MnBlue)

On that day, January 29th of this year, I asked “Just who does Erik Paulsen think he’s kidding?

Well, who Erik Paulsen didn’t fool, was the Candidate Endorsement Committee at The Star Tribune:

“Paulsen was a fiscal and social conservative in the Legislature, voting for measures that this newspaper opposed. Why he’s casting himself as a moderate in this race is unclear. (emphasis added) His conservative credentials are solid; he should have run on them.”(Star Tribune)

Hmmm….sounds familiar: “We’re never been stay the course” and “I’m a moderate in the mold of Frenzel and Ramstad.”

Simply not credible; simply not believable. Paulsen has run his entire campaign on a house of cards – trying to portray himself as something he clearly is not. It was noted immediately after his campaign announcement, and it was cemented in today’s Star Tribune non-endorsement.

In 83 days, January 20th 2009 will mark The End Of An Error. In one week, Americans go to the polls. Just as George W. Bush’s political career will be over, hopefully career politician Erik Paulsen’s political career will be over, too.

(crossposted at MnBlue)

(originally posted at MnProgressiveProject.com)

Did John Kline Ever Apologize?

Well, it seems that John Kline is outraged – OUTRAGED! – that a candidate is taking footage of Marines in uniform, and using said Marines in an ad. And he’s outraged. Here’s what Blogger Michael Broadkorb is reporting Congressman Kline said, over on M.D.E.:

I am outraged that Ashwin Madia would exploit uniformed Marines to advance his political ambitions. … He should immediately pull down the ad and issue an apology to the drill team and the brave men and women of the U.S. Marine Corps.” (M.D.E.)

Well, one would think, by Congressman Kline’s outrage, that he, himself, would never have used the military, or military veterans, to further HIS “political ambitions”, wouldn’t one? Or, if he HAD used the military, or military veterans, to further HIS “political ambitions”, Congressman Kline would have apologized, right?

Yeah, “right.”

Let’s take a look at a John Kline incident, from just two years ago.

On August 12th, 2006, John Kline attended an event with the Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA), in St. Paul. Randy Pleva, National President of the PVA, sent Congressman Kline a letter on August 28th, thanking Kline for showing up.

Now, it’s important to remember, that the PVA is a 501(c)3 not for profit.

So, what did Congressman Kline do, with that letter, from a not for profit Veterans Organization?

If you guessed Congressman Kline shamelessly used that letter to further Kline’s political career, you would be correct.

Here’s the entire verbage from the SECOND letter the PVA sent to Congressman Kline, dated 31 October 2006:

Dear Congressman Kline,

I write to you regarding a recent campaign flyer distributed by the Kline for Congress campaign (copy attached) that implies my endorsement, as President of Paralyzed Veterans of America, of your reelection. As a 501(c)3 not for profit organization we are precluded by law from endorsing or opposing any candidate for office. Not only was this language taken out of context and used without our knowledge, the fact is that this may put or organization’s good standing in jeopardy.

The language contained in the flyer comes from a letter (attached I sent you August 28, 2006 thanking you for your attendance at a fund raising event conducted by PVA’s Outdoor Recreation Heritage Fund. I find the selective editing for use in the flyer disingenuous at best.

I would appreciate that you and the campaign cease using this implied endorsement.
Thank you.

Sincerely,

Randy L. Pleva, Sr.
National President

cc: Federal Election Commission, Office of General Counsel

Here’s the first letter, that John Kline disingenously took out of context:

Here’s the second letter, that the PVA essentially said “cease and desist”:

Now, fastforward to yesterday, and remember Kline demanding someone else issue an apology. Ask yourself this: do you think John Kline ever apologized to the PVA, for shamelessly and disengenuously using Paralyzed American Veterans to shamelessly advance Kline’s career?

If you think Kline did NOT apologize, you would be correct; I know – because I called Randy Pleva, National President, and asked.

John Kline – as usual – is acting like the shameless and disengenuous hypocrite that has caused “GOP” to now stand for GreedOverPrinciples.

“Hypocrisy, thy party is GOP”

(cross posted at MnBlue, originally posted at MnProgressiveProject.com )