Updated with transcript

Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN) continues to emit Norm-speak^TM when confronted by reporters about allegations he received $75,000 from a company controlled by Nasser Kazeminy through his wife. Reporters confronted Norm in Rosemount, MN. This time Norm backed off his lies that Al Franken's campaign was involved, but now blames the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) without any proof.

He still does not refute the allegations he did not report these gifts, just continues to duck and dodge.

Video after the break, I'll work on a transcript after I get some sinus drops for the li'l peanut.

Update: Transcript

Here's my transcript of Norm's interaction with reporters:

Q: Would you like to [inintelligable] about the controversy surrounding your wife, her employer ...?

Norm: Ya know, Herb, the company has said that this is not true. That that that uh that the allegation is simply not true. I have said that this allegation is simply not true. And so and my frustration is that the Star Tribune reporters and by the way got it the week before these allegations and I don't know if they told you they didn't or they didn't respond to that but I'm telling you her employer was questioned about this a week before and the reporter said it arrived in an unmarked envelope, they got the same allegations that a week later appeared in a complaint and that the same data that appears in the complaint that the uh DSCC has a film uh a filming it uh filming the reporters and its on TV the day after its in the newspapers.

I just I just think that that those kind of politics and now she's being attacked on TV for something that isn't true, that has been denied that there's been no evidence at all, no evidence at all that that what's alleged there and its been denied by all who've with access to who've responded.

Q: Senator, reporters now say that any money that came from the Texas firm came to the Hays Company for work that she didn't do ... [unintelligle] ... she's not flat out saying she didn't get money for work she didn't do...

Norm (interrupting): Reporters said there's allegations that money was channeled over to the frim ha $75,000 that's a lie. K? That's a lie. So thats thats it ... a lie ... so she works for the firm and so just straight up that's a lie the allegation's not true and my and the issue the concern I have is you have the Democratic Senatorial Committee running an ad attacking my wife based upon innuendo that that was that was filmed the day this thing was public and a week before that the Star Tribune had these same alley before a complaint is filed the Star Tribune has these allegations. So a Texas lawsuit the allegations is in the hands of the Star Tribune in MN a week before a lawsuit is filed.

Q: A week before?

Norm: No, but I know her employer and uh we I know it was a week before. And and the Star Tribune folks told her employer that they'd received this in an unmarked envelope of these allegations:

Q: Are you talking about the summary of the lawsuit?

Norm: The charges. The same charges. Not the document of the lawsuit, but the same charges, allegations.

Q: One thing that people have asked is why would a Texas firm that has connections with Texas insurance companies do business with you wife's firm?

Norm: I think uh Mr. Kazeminy talk to the owner, talk to the owner. I presume they do his insurance. He came in and bought a company, I presume he was taking control of the company that's uh ...

Q: Take control ...

Norm (interrupting): That company. That no! No! No! But none of that has to do with us. The issue is that allegations were made about my wife that are not true. And the Democratic Senatorial Committee that has spent $4 million in this race had an ad up the day that the day that the complaint is filed running an ad attacking my wife. I think that I think that's slimy politics. I think that Minnesotans are going to reject this. I'm not arguing about the litigation, I'm just saying there's an attempt to use attack me throgh my wife. And I think that's outrageous.

Q: Do you think the motive...

Norm (interrupting and talking over the reporter): I have no idea. I have no idea. I'm not talking, I'm not talking about that. I have no idea. I don't know these people. I don't know him. My wife has never met him. I have no idea:

Q (talking over Norm): He's made some serious allegations...

Norm (talking over reporter): I have no idea. We've never met him. But the most serious allegation is that there is money being channeled over. Okay? And that's not true. And by the way even he says that he doesn't even know if its true, he's not even saying that's true. The most serious, the allegation that my wife that money was channeled through her. M'kay? Not true. Her employer says its not true, she says its not true and the owner by the way as I read today said that this is not true.

But the issue here is not the complaint, the issue here is there's an election and and and three days before an election you have an ad run by the Democratic Senatorial Committee eh about this issue the week before the complaint is file you have investigative reporters questioning about this issue and when that doesn't appear in the paper you have all of a sudden you have a complaint filed. I have no idea about this guy, I don't know him. My wife doesn't know him. But, but, I, I, again the issue here is using something for political purposes. You guys go, you know, figure out the legal stuff. All I know is there's an election three days three or four days before an election you have attack ads, an attack ad with claims about my wife that is simply untrue and I'm offended by that and I have no doubt that the people of MN are offended by it. That's what this issue is.

Q: [Unintellible ... something about Mr. Kazeminy?]

Norm; Doing what? Nothing. In other words the basic allegation, I know what he said [motioning to the other reporter] the basic allegation is that money was channeled has been denied. Denied by the company, denied by my wife and and I uh I think as I understand it not even confirmed by the person who put it in there. That's the alla that's what its about, I have no idea about the other stuff. This is a uh these guys are having some business argument. I don't care that. What I'm troubled with is that that the Star Tribune the week before this is filed a week before in the midst of a campaign has these allegations. I'm troubled that that that the day the Star Tribune reports and I'm not criticizing the press, somebody is using them here. The day they raise it you have a Democratic Senatorial Campaign camera filming that and its on a commercial the next day. M'kay? That's my concern. And that's the tactics I'm talking about and you guys, lawsuits can be figured out at any time ... but there's an election November 4th. So talk to me, my my what I'm outraged about is are attacks upon my wife that are simply untrue that are running right now in Democratis Senato, running right now in an Al Franken commercial right now that has no basis, that's what's in that commerical. An attack on my wife that's been denied by her employer, denied by her, by me, m'kay, and yet they are running it in an attempt to influence this election. That's what I'm concerned about.

Strong answer to follow. It's outrageous. I say you can attack me, m'kay. You you you wanna try and smear me, go ahead, but they're attacking my wife, in a commercial. Something that is simply untrue. And and I'm I'm deeply offended and I have no doubt that the people of MN are deeply offended, too. I have no doubt about that.