Franken Lawyer To State Supremes: Coleman Legally Undermining The Whole Recount
In the state Supreme Court hearings just now in Minnesota, regarding the Coleman campaign's allegations that a small number of damaged absentee ballots were copied and then double-counted in the recount, the Franken campaign made a striking accusation: That the implications of the Coleman camp's suit would mean the entire recount itself would be delegitimized, and would have be to run all over again.
At issue was the fact that the Coleman campaign has only picked 25 specific precincts where they say problems happened, and where they want the totals to be put back to the Election Night numbers to compensate for the alleged damage -- a change, by the way, that would just so happen to wipe out Al Franken's current lead and put Norm Coleman back ahead.
"All 4,001 precincts would have to be re-canvassed," said Franken lawyer William Pentelovitch. "They've cherry-picked what they want to look at."
At heart here is the issue of equal protection, which would seem to be violated by triggering a review of just 25 precincts for a problem that would have happened elsewhere, too. "I don't want to use the names of two former candidates for the presidency," Pentelovitch said. "But yes, that's the problem."
Later on, Coleman lawyer Roger Magnuson said this inquiry can legitimately be confined to just those 25 precincts: "Most election judges did this right. Most didn't make mistakes."
Frankenstein's citing Bush v. Gore no doubt
December 23, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
So, did Coleman's lawyer cite any actual evidence that they looked at any of the 3976 other precincts and determined they "did this right," other than "because we say so"?
Nah, I didn't think so...
December 23, 2008 4:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know the Republican mantra:
When the facts don't fit your argument, pound the law.
When the law doesn't fit your argument, pound the facts.
When neither the facts nor the law fit your argument, pound the table.
December 23, 2008 5:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or as a lawyer once told me:
If the facts fit your case, argue the facts.
If they don't, argue a fraud.
His political persuasion was self-evident.
December 23, 2008 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
What am I not getting here? Why would we reset the 25 precincts to Election Night totals?
At the minimum, why would we not re-recount the precincts in question?
Meanwhile, is there any real evidence there were more ballots counted than there were voters signed in at these precincts? That would seem to answer the 'double-counted' question pretty clearly.
December 23, 2008 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Becuase recounting the the selected Districts in question would make sense THEN necessitate recounting all the rest of the districts due to the concept of equal protection. Without PROOF, there is not reason to consider any of the recounted Districts suspect . . . Unless they are all suspect then voting itself is suspect . . . (Rampant Republicanism and Norm Coleman explained). Viva the Fascist!!!!
December 23, 2008 7:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
How much more taxpayer money does Norm Coleman want to waste re-re-counting the votes until he gets a total, or a court judgement, that he likes?
December 23, 2008 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
When I look at how carefully and seriously Minnesota's election officials and volunteers have carried out this election and recount,hearing Coleman's lawyer say "Most election judges did this right. Most didn't make mistakes." must be the step too into oblivion. I don't see how Coleman has a prayer of any support on any level for recourse after a comment like that calls into question anyone and everyone who isn't named outright.
December 23, 2008 7:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree, anyone has watched these meetings/recount via the internet live feed can see just how fair it's been. In fact, I can't believe Ritchie broke so many ties in favor of/awarding the ballot/vote to Coleman. If you've watched it you've seen it for yourself. The whole panel awarded so many to Coleman which I thought were a nobody or Franken vote.
Which leads to where is the at least audio link for the current meetings? Ritchie said there would be an audio link and then, I think CBS, said they're provide a video stream. I've called the Ritchie's office this morning and she said she thought there was supposed to be feeds but doesn't see them anywhere either. This is really bad for Ritchie because we all have seen how fair it's been but now we can see the last of it. Why give Coleman a reason to wine? Number One priority should be to restore a video link!
December 23, 2008 8:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
but now we canNOT see the last of it. (I wish TPM had an "Edit" button to posts!)
December 23, 2008 8:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Video and audio was presented yesterday via the uptake. (www.uptake.org) dropped in on it a few times yesterday
December 24, 2008 9:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Why don't they just toss a coin? It's basically a tie and this back and forth by lawyers is making an already incompetently managed Minnesota election look even more arbitrary and capricious. Toss a coin and get it over with.
December 23, 2008 9:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have spent many hours watching the canvasing board. They have set a standard for transparency and competence that few if any other states could match.
December 23, 2008 11:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I couldn't disagree more. There has been nothing arbitrary or capricious about it. I have been hugely impressed by how well its been handled and forseen by existing MN state law.
Doubtless there will be continuing challenges due to the razor thin margin and both candidates doing what they can to get their guy across the finish line. But there has been none of the pandimonium or acrimony we saw in 2000 or 2004, and I think when all is said and done, most voters will be satisfied that the system produced a fair result in an incredibly tight race.
December 24, 2008 9:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
so did the mnsc make a ruling?
December 23, 2008 10:17 PM | Reply | Permalink