Subscribe to our RSS feed
Follow us on Twitter
Photo: The UpTake
Joe Friedberg, the star attorney who gave the closing arguments for Norm Coleman last week in Minnesota’s Senate trial, predicts his client won’t prevail in the election contest without appealing to the state Supreme Court. When the current three-judge panel rules, Friedberg told a local radio audience, ”Franken will still be ahead and probably by a little bit more (than his 225-vote margin in the recount).”
Friedberg was interviewed Wednesday by Ron Rosenbaum on “The Dan Barreiro Show” on KFAN-AM (mp3, starts at 22:22). A partial excerpt:
ROSENBAUM: Joe, are you done?
FRIEDBERG: Yes (laughing), I’m done.
ROSENBAUM: Let me ask you in a different way. Is Norm done?
FRIEDBERG: Well, I think that we’ve been trying this case with the appeal record in mind, and that’s where we’re going, and it’s going to be a very quick appeal, and then I’ll know whether or not it worked.
ROSENBAUM: Well, when you say quick appeal, are you confident that you are going to lose the case in front of the three-judge panel? By losing the case, I mean Norm ends up with less votes.
FRIEDBERG: I think that’s probably correct that Franken will still be ahead and probably by a little bit more. But our whole argument was a constitutional argument, and it’s an argument suitable for the Minnesota Supreme Court, not for the trial court. So we’ll see whether we were right or not.
The dialogue then veered into the background of the equal-protection argument Coleman’s side has asserted, from its past application in elections that featured racial and ethnic discrimination to the Bush v. Gore case in 2000.
Friedberg said the U.S. Supreme Court didn’t expect that case’s circumstances to recur, “where different standards were applying in different electoral precincts … The court didn’t think they’d ever look at another one. Well, hi. We’re here.”
Later:
ROSENBAUM: In point of fact, our system isn’t capable of handling it, right?
FRIEDBERG: No, because frankly, no matter what happens, nobody will ever know who got the — quote — most votes. Nobody will ever know that. …
ROSENBAUM: So we could still be awhile before this thing gets decided?
FRIEDBERG: Yeah, I think that’s clearly true.
Hat tip: Hotline On Call (via MnPublius).
Leave a comment
Become a fan on Facebook
8 Comments »
Comment posted March 20, 2009 @ 11:28 am
Friedberg keeps saying that we don’t and won’t know who “quote” got the most votes. That may be true for him, but for everyone else it’s pretty clear that Franken got the most votes. Had Friedberg made a better effort to “prove” more of his debatable absentee ballots, Coleman might have increased his total count by more that the 6 or so that will be added to his total via Friedberg plus however many of the absentees that put their registration cards inside the secrecy envelopes that will be votes for him. Coleman will still be behind because, although this was a very close vote, he is still the loser. It’s a sad lesson every child learns: sometimes you lose and it’s better if you do it with some degree of grace.
Comment posted March 20, 2009 @ 12:59 pm
Of course Friedberg’s setting this up for the appeal. He’s trying to create, out of thin air, grounds for some sort of equal-protection case by sliming the hardworking people on Minnesota’s state, county and local elections boards. However, he can’t be quite as mendacious about it as is Bogus Ben Ginsberg, because he’s actually representing Norm in court.
The one thing that Friedberg can’t get around: Minnesota state law, as the Election Contest Court has stated in their rulings so far in this case, considers absentee voting to be a privilege and not a right. That means that there is no possible violation of the equal-protection clause because it simply doesn’t apply here. The Coleman camp’s trying to use a statute from another state to trump this, but that particular statute is not relevant or applicable to the situation here and now.
Pingback posted March 20, 2009 @ 6:49 pm
[...] Soon-to-be-former Minnesota Senator Norm Coleman has some of the best lawyers dirty money can buy. And one of them just basically admitted that his current strategy is “tie this election up in court forever.” [...]
Comment posted March 21, 2009 @ 9:41 am
The extended delay in the resolution of this election is bought and paid for by the national GOP. This has very little to do with Minnesota’s so-called “IR” (Irritated Repiglicans) party.
Coleman has assumed the role of Lamb Chop and the National GOP is Shari Lewis. They have their hand up his backside and are calling the shots. Coleman will lose before the three-judge panel and will lose again in front of the Minnesota Supreme Court. But this is not about “fairness” or “the integrity of the franchise” or “seeing that every vote is counted”. It’s about repubs desperately trying to slow down the tide of change that was mandated nationwide as a result of the November elections. And it isn’t going to work.
Comment posted March 21, 2009 @ 11:43 pm
These GOPhers just keep going down their tunnels and coming up with more crooked deals. They’ve lost, then lost again, and now, yet again. But back down they go, searching their larder for more poison to try to stop the fair and final election count. They’ll choke on it themselves. But not before taking their stench to the State Supreme Court, and beyond. Their goal: keep the seat empty.
Pingback posted March 24, 2009 @ 6:40 am
[...] Minnesota Independent [...]
Comment posted March 29, 2009 @ 9:25 am
Might I correct the previous commenter? Coleman WON the first vote! Franken lost! Just thought this site could use a little truth for once. Thank you.
Comment posted March 31, 2009 @ 8:57 pm
Give it up Norm, before you screw any chance to get elected to public office again!
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment