Comments on: Texas lawsuit alleging that Coleman received tainted $75,000 from pal Kazeminy is re-instated

By: Joe the Watergate Plumber

Joe the Watergate Plumber — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:41:38 +0000

A story now should be why the Strib was late covering it and why it is not at all in the
Pi-Press. Tim Nelson has it on MPR, doesn’t he write for the little PP?

I think the real deal is that the media, specifically the 2 main papers, are so far out of touch
with the people that the corporate agenda (Nasser and buddies) is the only thing being pushed
on us.

Go Indy, kick their inky butts! Craigs has broken the want ad cash cow monopoly,
now you guys have broken the news scoop monopoly. When I want to know what is up
I do not go to the PP or the Red Star.

By: Mark Kraft

Mark Kraft — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 11:09:10 +0000

Note to Minnesotan:

If this lawsuit is settled, that *DOESN”T* mean that Coleman isn’t guilty, or that he cannot be investigated, or that criminal charges cannot be filed against him.

This lawsuit is strictly about how Nasser Kazeminy — Norm Coleman’s money man — ripped off his former business partner.

By: Mark Kraft

Mark Kraft — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 11:03:57 +0000

This isn’t some sort of smear effort by the Democrats.

The plaintiff, Paul McKim, is a prominent REPUBLICAN businessman who has donated repeatedly for the Republican party!

http://www.campaignmoney.com/political/contributions/paul-mckim.asp?cycle=06

And yet, Coleman’s people call this lawsuit “vicious” and “defamatory”, filed for political purposes. By a Republican…

“Defamatory” is a codeword for saying that Coleman’s lawyers might once more waste the Minnesota taxpayer’s money by filing a frivilous defamation lawsuit against Mr. McKee of Houston, TX… only to drop the lawsuit later, after they get their publicallly indignant posturing out of the way, because they *KNOW* they don’t want this going to court!

Expect Coleman’s close friend Nasser to bail him out on this by offering McKim a lot of money to drop the lawsuit, on the condition that McKee can’t ever discuss the case or the terms of the settlement again.