FEC says donors can pay Coleman, Franken legal bills

  • Article by: PAT DOYLE , Star Tribune
  • Updated: March 24, 2009 - 12:06 PM

The campaign rivals won a key decision that could make it easier to fund their ongoing and expensive court battle.

  • 38
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
shrewdreaderMar. 23, 0910:04 PM

Not until I see some representation. This is the biggest waste of money- vote again or give up... whichever is easier for you Norm.

8
22
abowers13Mar. 23, 0910:16 PM

Any word from the Court on when a ruling is expected?

31
1
snapscanMar. 23, 0910:26 PM

Norm, I'm looking at you. Since you are a trained RINO for the national party leaders and could not care less what happens to Minnesotans... once you lose ask them to pay all court costs and damages you have caused to Minnesota.

43
6
lyfemyndeMar. 23, 0910:34 PM

"although up-to-date figures are not available, the candidates are believed to have raised at least $11 million combined since the November election to pay for the recount and trial." -------------------------------------------------- "This is not a frivolous sort of enterprise," he said, referring to Coleman's court challenge, which is allowed under state election law. "I think the judges will be reasonable about this." "Burning through cash to pay their platoons of high-priced legal talent, Franken and Coleman, through their allies, persuaded the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to clear the way for national party organizations to pay some of the millions of dollars in expenses for lawyers and other workers during the recount and trial." ------------------------------------------------ Both sides are likely to be paying most of their own legal bills, although state law says the contestant -- Coleman -- must pay court costs if he loses. Franken is less likely under the law to pay court costs if he loses. He also has asked the court to order Coleman, should he fail to overturn the recount, to pay some of the DFLer's costs and legal fees. ------------------------------------------------ "This is not a frivolous sort of enterprise," he said, referring to Coleman's court challenge, which is allowed under state election law. "I think the judges will be reasonable about this."

18
1
memorylaneMar. 23, 0910:38 PM

needs to be flushed away

36
7
ch3201Mar. 23, 0910:43 PM

yep. expect the public to bail 'em out. sad thing is some people are stupid enough to actually give these two clowns money. sad state of affairs.

10
14
callimacoMar. 23, 0911:00 PM

The court got themselves in a pickle for the Friday the 13th ruling. They should flip a coin.

0
30
SeppukuMar. 23, 0911:28 PM

Somebody needs to be seated so the Senator can start taking care of their constituency. At one point in his career I used to thing Coleman was a halfway decent dude, even when he switched parties (I don't claim either party, so I didn't care). I've come away from this whole mess thinking Coleman is about as slimy as a politician can be and I don't trust him as far as I can kick him. Franken isn't much better, but at least I already knew he was an idiot. Coleman at least fooled me for awhile. Minnesota is worse off having either of these two fools represent us. The only positive thing I could say about this whole situation is at least I don't live in Illinois.

12
24
scott70Mar. 23, 0911:31 PM

Coleman, now listen/read closely. The money you can raise can only be used for the recount, not for teeth whitening. That would be a personal expense, of which someone can pay for it but just not deduct it. By the way, I'm thinking those pieces of ceramic in your mouth are plenty white for the daytime, but there might be a glow-in-the-dark treatment you can pursue to make your upcoming local/non-Wash. DC bar-closing nightlife more interesting.

29
6
lyfemyndeMar. 23, 0911:59 PM

"although up-to-date figures are not available, the candidates are believed to have raised at least $11 million combined since the November election to pay for the recount and trial." THE STATE MANDATED RECOUNT WAS PICKED UP BY THE TAXPAYER. THE OBSERVERS FROM EACH CAMPAIGN WHO WERE PRESENT AT EVERY STAGE OF THE RECOUNT ARE THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE RESPECTIVE CAMPAIGNS. ALL LEGAL FEES FOLLOWING ARE AGAIN THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE RESPECTIVE CAMPAIGNS. COURT COSTS NORMALLY ARE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE THE PARTY BRINGING SUIT IF THEY LOSE THE TRIAL. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "This is not a frivolous sort of enterprise," he said, referring to Coleman's court challenge, which is allowed under state election law. "I think the judges will be reasonable about this." FRIVOLOUS IS SEEN DIFFERENTLY BY BOTH CAMPS ALTHOUGH AFTER A METICULOUS RECOUNT OBSERVED AND SIGNED OFF ON BY BOTH CAMPS AND A CIVIL TRIAL WHERE THE JUDGES BENT OVER BACKWARD TO BE FAIR THE WORD FRIVOLOUS DOES BEGIN TO HAVE CACHE. JUST BECAUSE YOU WANT SOMETHING REALLY BAD AND YOU HAVE A SEEMINGLY INEXHAUSTIBLE FLOW OF MONEY FROM RNC COFFERS DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN YOUR SUIT IS NOT FRIVOLOUS. ----------------------------------------------------------- "Burning through cash to pay their platoons of high-priced legal talent, Franken and Coleman, through their allies, persuaded the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to clear the way for national party organizations to pay some of the millions of dollars in expenses for lawyers and other workers during the recount and trial." AHEM WHO IS REALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COSTS OF THIS CAMPAIGN? THE "BURNING THROUGH CASH?" ITS FAIR TO SAY THAT THE COLEMAN CAMPAIGN BEARS THE MAJORITY OF THE RESPONSIBILITY. ------------------------------------------------ Both sides are likely to be paying most of their own legal bills, although state law says the contestant -- Coleman -- must pay court costs if he loses. Franken is less likely under the law to pay court costs if he loses. He also has asked the court to order Coleman, should he fail to overturn the recount, to pay some of the DFLer's costs and legal fees. THE COURT COSTS ARE COLEMAN'S RESPONSIBILITIES. AS FAR AS LEGAL COSTS OCCURRED BY FRANKEN HE MIGHT BE IN THE RIGHT BUT THINK OF ALL THE LEGAL COSTS THAT WOULD AGAIN MOUNT AS THIS ISSUE WOULD BE IN FURTHER COURT AND SUNDRY EXPENSES. IF FRANKEN WINS AND HE PURSUES SATISFACTION FOR INCURRED EXPENSES I THINK IT COULD BE CONSTRUED AS PETTY ON FRANKEN'S PART AND GIVEN THE ANIMOSITIES GENERATED BY THIS WHOLE AFFAIR IT WOULD BE IN THE INTEREST OF MINNESOTA AT LARGE TO LET THIS BE LETTING A SLEEPING DOG LIE. ------------------------------------------------

21
3

Comment on this story   |  

ADVERTISEMENT

Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT