Comments on: WSJ recount editorial prompts non-meek response from Judge Cleary

By: rainman

rainman — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:47:58 +0000

Let’s hope the DFL would not submit such a partisan piece of trash if Franken were the one down by 225 votes….I, for one, would not condone that type of spin. The Judge deserves our thanks, along with the other four Board members..well done!

By: Cybear

Cybear — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 17:02:48 +0000

It would have been more effective had he rebutted their very specific criticisms.

By: Chris W

Chris W — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 19:59:50 +0000

Thank you Judge Cleary,

I saw much of the CB meetings and I was very impressed by the openness, honesty, civility and non-partisan nature of the proceedings. Also, thank you for standing up to those in the press who would attempt to influence public opinion by passing off ‘inaccuracies’ (as you so politely put it, I’d call them lies) as fact.

By: John

John — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 18:50:43 +0000

God Bless you Judge Cleary. This was a fantastic process that should be and is the emulation of the nation.

By: Eric Ferguson

Eric Ferguson — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 04:49:14 +0000

Did the WSJ print the letter?

By: Girlfriend

Girlfriend — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 04:27:47 +0000

Say it, Judge!

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 02:27:23 +0000

Thank you Judge Cleary

By: Ray

Ray — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 00:06:33 +0000

The WSJ at http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122644940271419147.html was also wrong about the events leading to the first lawsuit filed by the Colman Campaign, but no clarification or retraction ever provided.

Norm Coleman and Coleman for Senate ‘08 vs. Cynthia Reichert, in her capacity as the Director of Elections of the City of Minneapolis; John Doe and Jane Doe, Unnamed Minnesota county auditors or Minnesota election officials at http://mncourts.gov/?page=3409