The Portland blog that might know why Trent Lott really resigned.

On Monday, Senator Trent Lott (R-MS) announced his resignation, shocking the political world. After all, he'd just been re-elected last year - and he'd recently regained a leadership post.

Why did Lott resign? Was he bailing out, like so many Republicans, frustrated at their new minority status that doesn't show any sign of changing? Did he resign abruptly because of the impending arrival of new revolving-door regulations that would have delayed a career as a lobbyist?

Or was there a scandal about to break?

David Rossmiller is an attorney at Portland law firm Dunn, Carney, Allen, Higgins & Tongue. He also blogs professionally, writing the Insurance Coverage Law Blog.

Rossmiller has been aggressively covering the FBI investigation into a law firm headed up by Trent Lott's brother-in-law and next-door neighbor, Dickie Scruggs. It turns out that the day after Senator Lott resigned, the FBI raided his brother-in-law's law firm -- in an investigation that involves State Farm Insurance, the Mississippi Attorney General, and Katrina-related fraud. Earlier today, Scruggs and his son (Lott's nephew) were indicted for attempting to bribe a judge.

The questions: What did Trent Lott know? When did he know it? Did he do anything help Scruggs? And did he resign because he knew about the impending FBI raid and indictment of his brother-in-law and nephew?

The best summary of the speculative "Scandal Theory" comes from Timothy Noah at Slate.com:

Our story begins in August 2005, when Hurricane Katrina wreaked its vengeance on the Gulf Coast. In addition to depopulating New Orleans, this unwelcome weather event had the temerity to knock down Lott's 154-year-old beachfront home in Pascagoula, Miss., and also the home of Dickie Scruggs, who in addition to being Lott's brother-in-law was also Lott's neighbor. Lott filed a claim with his insurer, State Farm, but State Farm denied the claim, arguing that the culprit was not high winds, which the policy covered, but rather flooding, which the policy didn't cover. (Lott had separately purchased federal flood insurance, but that didn't come close to covering his losses.) Scruggs filed suit on Lott's behalf.

Scruggs also created a Scruggs Katrina Group to pursue similar lawsuits and very likely encouraged his friend [Attorney General Jim] Hood to do the same. ...

Lott, meanwhile, declared war not only on State Farm ... but on the entire insurance industry. He introduced legislation requiring homeowner insurers to clarify what their policies cover and what they don't; he co-sponsored legislation to eliminate the antitrust exemption for insurance companies; he brought Hood up to Washington to testify before the Senate commerce committee, of which he is a member; and he entered internal State Farm e-mails concerning Katrina coverage into the Senate hearing record.

According to Chuck Chamness, CEO of the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, Lott phoned him last year and threatened "bringing down State Farm and the industry." It was, complained Wall Street Journal editorialist Kimberley Strassel, "a ferocious campaign of political revenge that would make even Henry Waxman envious." Strassel even called it "extortion," noting that State Farm had quickly settled with Hood and Scruggs, and paid off Lott. (The settlement has since come unglued.)

Strassel probably didn't mean to be taken literally, but the question lingers: Did Lott's uncharacteristically liberal Senate crusade, or any support he gave Scruggs or Hood, include actions that were potentially illegal? ...

Now that you've got the summary, head to Rossmiller's blog for the latest blow-by-blow developments.

Discuss.