As another Democratic group that spent millions of dollars attempting to defeat me calls for a politically motivated investigation, I want to be clear that I not only welcome such an investigation, but I am eager to have it move forward immediately. The fact that a United States Senator is being used as a tool of extortion by private parties should be of concern to all Minnesotans. I reiterate that none of the allegations which attempt to besmirch my family’s good name and reputation are true. This investigation should move forward, and it is my hope that those who were behind this matter, their motives and what their connections may be to my political opponents be reviewed aggressively by the appropriate authorities and the media. This matter, which has emerged again as a result of the tactics of my political opponents, during a recount, ought to raise even further suspicions in the minds of Minnesotans as to its motives and purposes.
[emphasis added]. What do you make of that wording? I don't know what he means, but I think if you use that kind of wording, and if you want any credibility, then you have to go into detail of what you know backing up the choice of wording used as at all proper or appropriate - words in this kind of serious leveling of charges have to be used carefully since this is a studied release of a printed statement and not any extemporaneous thing, but deliberate and premeditated as to detail and nuance.
When you say such things as "tool" and "extortion" you are saying there was crime. Accusing someone or a number of persons, of the crime of extortion is serious, and to somehow be a tool in all of that, having an involvement in an extortion - begs a clarification providing full detailing.
I have seen the Coleman statement commented upon at two blog sites, here and here. At the latter site I left a comment which instead of paraphrasing, I quote:
eric z Says:
November 14th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
This is most interesting because it raises more questions by far than it gives answers.
Who was extorting what from whom, or attempting it, and how, exactly?
How was Senator Coleman being “used as a tool”?
Used as a means, that could include a passive dimension.
“Used as a tool,” is the Senator’s chosen wording, and you do not use a tool passively, there is some active use - where the tool is by the nature of active use, privy to the process.
How was this Senator privy to being used as a tool? When did it happen? What was his earliest disclosure of being “used as a tool”?
I think that language alone, never mind the clarion call Senator Norm Coleman used to invite an investigation, is by itself cause to want to inquire. I believe the best possible starting point is for the mainstream media to press the Senator to explain himself publicly, not to glide and slide, but name names, state dates, describe actions and activities. Less than that would just look very, very bad.
Surely there are slang uses of the word "tool" that I have heard applied to Norm Coleman, but I am certain he must have meant something different.
What exactly he meant is for him to flesh out.
__________UPDATE_________
What's to be made of this? Anything, or simple coincidence? Nov. 12, a public interest advocacy group sends a letter requesting an ethics investigation of Senator Coleman by the Senate Ethics Committee, the letter being addressed to the chairpersson and ranking member, Barbara Boxer and John Cornyn, respectively. Next item, PiPress Political Animal reports Nov. 14, that Senator Coleman withdraws his effort to be chosen head of NRSC, that morning:
[...] This morning, spokesman Leroy Coleman in Washington provided an unequivocal "no" to a series of parse-proof questions about whether the FBI, the Senate Select Committee on Ethics or any other investigatory agency, body or jurisdiction has notified the office it's under investigation. Yesterday, the campaign gave equally clear answers in the negative regarding the senator and his campaign. [...]
[Minnesota DFL Chair Brian] Melendez also brought up Coleman's bid for the chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee -- a touchy issue for the senator, who's been tip-toeing around his candidacy for the highly partisan position during the entire re-election campaign.
Bottom line: Coleman was a candidate for the position -- but is no longer.
"The senator decided to step back so he could focus on the recount," Leroy Coleman said this morning. "He throws his full support behind Sen. (John) Cornyn (of Texas) for that position."
Is it yet another instance of the appearance of a possible quid pro quo, no investigation, no NRSC contest, instead an endorsement of friend Cornyn of the Ethics Committee for the coveted and powerful GOP party post? Infer what you will. To me that is an interesting juxtaposition even if it is a total and sheer coincidence.