Deposition: Businessman Ordered Money Funneled To Norm Coleman
We now have some new evidence in a story that dogged Norm Coleman in the final days of his 2008 Senate reelection campaign. According to the original report, businessman Nasser Kazeminy, a longtime Coleman friend, arranged for money to be paid to Norm Coleman's wife, for no work done, as a way of funneling money to Coleman himself.
Now the Star-Tribune has obtained a March 19 deposition from the lawsuit that first surfaced the scandal. The deposition is from B.J. Thomas, the chief financial officer of the company that paid out $75,000 to a firm where Laurie Coleman worked as a consultant -- even though he found no evidence of actual work.
Thomas was asked: "In that conversation that you had with Mr. Kazeminy, did he tell you, quote, United States senators don't make shit, close quote? Or words to that effect?"
Thomas answered: "Yes, sir."
In all, the Kazeminy is alleged to have ordered $100,000 in payments to the Colemans. Norm's attorney Doug Kelley told the Strib: "I can assure you that not a penny found its way to Laurie Coleman or Senator Norm Coleman. Period. End of story."
When these allegations emerged during the final days of the campaign, Coleman said it was a dirty trick from the Franken campaign and the Democrats.
Here's what DSCC spokesman Eric Schultz (who was also Franken's media guy during that campaign) told TPM: "I'll be curious to see if Norm Coleman still tries to peddle to Minnesota reporters that this was an 11th hour political attack, given the election is now five months old."
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
March 27, 2009 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Frome the Hays company statement in October:
------------------
We believe the allegations in the lawsuit...are libelous and defamatory, and we intend to protect our name and our reputation vigorously with whatever means necessary.....
......Laurie Coleman receives no compensation related to the services we provide for our client Deep Marine Technology.
In the first half of 2007, we were retained to provide our risk management consulting services, and that work continues at this time.
------------
Doesn't quite square with the CFO testimony.
March 27, 2009 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
According to Norm's attorney Doug Kelley: "I can assure you that not a penny found its way to Laurie Coleman or Senator Norm Coleman. Period. End of story."
But the truth is probably something more like this: "I can assure you that not a penny found its way to Laurie Coleman or Senator Norm Coleman. Norm and Laurie personally escorted each and every last one of those pennies back home. Period. End of story."
Or this: "I can assure you that not a penny found its way to Laurie Coleman or Senator Norm Coleman. It was all in unmarked $100 bills. Period. End of story."
March 27, 2009 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, Minnnesota's electoral system has been in labor for five months, but has not yet actually given birth; establihing an age for the election might be somewhat problematic...
March 27, 2009 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Time for Coleman to pivot from trying to game the election process and work on staying out of prison.
March 27, 2009 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
As long as it seems to be nearly an all-Minnesota day today, did anyone mention that my next senator was just honored by the USO for touring the last ten years? http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/41865582.html?elr=KArksUUUU
March 27, 2009 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Norm's lawyer is right. Not one penny. You see $100k in pennies is a burdensome load. If you take it twenties, fifties, and hundreds, it is much more manageable.
March 27, 2009 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Though not being privy to the risk management discussions, I was at DMT during the period in question. I reported to B J Thomas and had an indirect reporting relationship to McKim. It isn't popular to side with the big investor against the little guy, but my money is on Kazeminy and Hayes when it comes to telling the truth. In my observation, it would not be far-fetched for the Hayes company to have done legitimate consulting work that Thomas and McKim did not know about.
McKim, especially, did not appear to be very astute in those sorts of matters, and it was clear that he greatly resented Kazeminy's "interference," even though it was mostly Kazeminy's money that kept DMT afloat. Look, its up to you Minnesotans who you select for the Senate, but there really does not appear to be a scandal here. Kazeminy did not like the way the insurance was brokered for the company in which he was a majority owner; he hired a legitimate consulting company, as many other companies do, to manage the brokering of the insurance business (and, yes, many do hire firms that have friends or acquaintenances on staff); $100k is not an excessive amount for consulting services; Thomas and McKim have no idea whether legitimate consulting services were provided because Kazeminy and crew (Ellingboe, Erickson) most likely were not impressed by McKim's overall performance and did not choose to involve either of them; and DMT had that same year (2007) paid a rival company $1 million over the theft of intellectual property (not to mention the loss of profits while the other company's lawyer's commandeered electronic files for several weeks). Is this a real political scandal, or a classic case of sour grapes on McKim's part? I believe it is the latter.
In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that I was fired by a screaming, raging Paul McKim a couple of days before Thanksgiving- 2007. Appropriate. I am thankful that I am no longer at DMT and, from what I hear, many of those at DMT are very thankful that McKim is no longer there.
April 3, 2009 4:33 AM | Reply | Permalink