There is a tentative trial date for August, but that may change. It is also possible that Vennes will change his plea and hope the judge will reduce his sentence by cooperating with the DOJ. That could be a concern for Bachmann if there was any quid pro quo regarding his donations and Bachmann's pardon letter (Vennes, not a constituent was Bachmann's top donor in 2006). Another scenario is that Vennes will plead guilty and receive a short vacation at Club Fed without ratting on anyone.
If there is a trial, Bachmann could be called as a character witness for Vennes. Bachmann's 2007 letter is a glowing tribute to the character of Frank Vennes, Bachmann personally vouches for Vennes:
As a U.S. Representative, I am confident of Mr. Vennes’ successful rehabilitation and that a pardon will be good for the neediest of society. Mr. Vennes is seeking a pardon so that he may be further used to help others. As I know from personal experience, Mr. Vennes has used his business position and success to fund hundreds of nonprofit organizations dedicated to helping the neediest in our society....
If she testifies, Bachmann will likely have to say whether she still agrees with that rosy assessment of the character of Mr. Vennes. Bachmann may also have to testify on cross-examination why she hastily withdrew the letter. What evidence did Bachmann have, that we don't have that Vennes was undeserving of a pardon. Even now, Vennes is still considered innocent until proven guilty under the law.
There is lots of evidence, some that was presented at the trial of Tom Petters that implicates Frank Vennes in the scam. Two cohorts of Frank Vennes have pleaded guilty and will likely testify against Vennes. There is a third possible witness who has pled guilty to fraud in relation to the Petters case and she may also appear as a witness against Vennes, It's not looking too good for an acquittal. The best strategy for the defense is "jury nullification" - calling witness after witness to testify that Vennes was such a good Christian that the jury should disregard the evidence and the judge's instructions and return a verdict of "not guilty".
If Bachmann is called to testify, will she testify for, or against Frank Vennes? Is it possible for Bachmann to still claim as she did in 2008 that she doesn't have enough facts to determine whether Frank Vennes played a vital role in the Petters Ponzi scheme?
Stay tuned....
Click on the arrest warrant below to make it bigger:
Cross-posted at the Dump Bachmann blog.
