Comments on: MN Supreme Court hears Franken-Coleman contest

By: Will Stuart Smalley Beat Back The Dark Spectre of Republican Tyranny? | Human Trend

Tue, 30 Jun 2009 20:07:21 +0000

[...] He lost, and Coleman has tried to get numerous courts to overturn the decision. As we speak, the Minnesota Supreme Court is looking at the case where lizard people and dead people cast their votes for Stuart Smalley (Al [...]

By: Packeryman

Packeryman — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 16:54:01 +0000

Maybe the voters of MN have learned a lesson, never again vote for another Republican. In doing so you want have big out of state GOP money coming in to deny you representation. The governor is also acting like a jerk in this situation. I guess he is looking for conservative support in the GOP for a future run.

By: Gabriel

Gabriel — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 20:40:42 +0000

Really? You’ve forgotten the 2000 presidential fiasco already? Or does that not count because it went the other way than this one seems to be heading? Hypocrisy knows no bounds…

By: Ann Erickson

Ann Erickson — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 15:30:11 +0000

The voting and results of the Coleman vs Franken for United States Senate seat is very suspicious and fraudulent. How can you rule on a case that had Coleman ahead by approximately 225 and because a recount was necessary the recount was full of terrible mistakes? Instead of a complete recount of the votes, there was a selection of precincts that favored Franken chosen and there were more votes counted than the number of voters in the precincts. All of the absentee ballots were not counted.

This is America and Americans believe in truth and their rights as citizens. It seems to me that the recount should be complete and with honest people overseeing it. We are experiencing the worst time I can remember where our rights as citizens are not upheld. Leaders are ruining our country for all of us who want to preserve our great country.

Please use your care when making your decision about this race. It is an important race for the whole country.

Sincerely,
Ann Erickson

By: Dan

Dan — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:37:59 +0000

Hopefully when the State supreme court rules in Franken’s favor they include and order to the Governor to certify Franken. Pawlenty can either follow that order or face charges.
Pawlenty would probably welcome and order to certify from the court as it would absolve him of any political consequences of making the choice himself.

By: judybrown

judybrown — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 06:48:28 +0000

A Dollar a Day to Make Norm Coleman Go Away

Let’s give Norm a hint:

Republicans in DC know Al Franken won.

But they are bankrolling Norm Coleman’s continued court challenges in Minnesota to keep Al Franken out of the Senate.

There was no downside to this Republican strategy–until now!

Democracy for America and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee launched the “Dollar a Day to Make Norm Go Away” campaign. Each day Coleman refuses to concede, thousands of us are donating $1 to help progressives defeat Republicans in 2010.

It’s working! Over $135,000 has already been raised! And now, we’ve “doubled down” and are aiming for $200,000.

Can you add to our great momentum by donating $1 a day?

Donations go to the Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which helps progressive candidates run effective campaigns and win.

https://services.myngp.com/NGPOnlineServices/contribution.aspx?X=Ded7FwPHDshrGtqFOE7vW9VcwgIMiaBGhXdSUiuRDlw%3d

By: Mark Stephenson

Mark Stephenson — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 02:46:54 +0000

Has Franken’s photo been reversed? The stripes on his tie run in the British direction – opposite to the American way.

By: lazercat

lazercat — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 00:05:07 +0000

Can we just rule Norman and his high priced lawyer in contempt now?

“It’s always a tricky business to read clues into the questions that judges ask the lawyers during these proceedings — despite some basic assumptions about how this works, judges can surprise you. But if we just go by the basic assumptions, it didn’t look good for Coleman, with the judges asking pointed questions of Friedberg that at certain points amounted to ridicule of him for putting on a shoddy case.”

At one point, Justice Christopher Dietzen went over Team Coleman’s written offers of proof — filings of proposed evidence that an attorney makes when a trial court won’t admit it as official evidence, but he wants to preserve it for future appeals. “I’ve never seen an offer of proof like this,” said Dietzen, complaining that the offers didn’t actually identify specific potential witnesses or what their presumed evidence would have been been — only continued arguments that “a substantial number” of ballots exist. Dietzen added that “the rules of evidence, the rules of civil procedure apply. Now why is this offer of proof not inadequate, in that we don’t have admissible evidence that can show whether you’ve met your burden?”–TPM

“Justice Helen Meyer, … asked Friedberg why he did not compile evidence from all counties, as opposed to about two dozen, to prove their case about unequal treatment. “You’re asking us to presume that, based on the evidence of a sampling of counties,” said Meyer.”–TPM

I have no case, I’m just setting things up for my appeals.

By: Minnesota Central

Minnesota Central — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 18:28:30 +0000

I was struck by Justice Page’s first question for Ellis which trended on jurisdiction and that the Senate could decide who and when to seat Minnesota’s Senator. With the justices deciding the case today but taking month(es) to issue a formal ruling, Page is essentially telling everybody “Don’t blame us, the Senate can decide anytime they want.” This was previously stated in the Franken -v- Pawlenty lawsuit.
That begs the question whether Page was tipping his hand as to how he will vote ?