Coleman Lawyer: We're Finding More Votes!
Coleman lawyer/spin-man Ben Ginsberg made a stunning announcement at this evening's press conference: Stearns County now reports that they've found seven new ballots.
"That's another significant development, showing the inaccuracy of the canvassing board total," Ginsberg said, "and we feel good about the votes that will be coming in."
This comes after two other pro-Coleman counties, Washington and Anoka, were finding similarly small numbers of missing ballots late last week, events that the Coleman campaign cheered. (Stearns voted 46%-34% for Coleman.)
These ballots could all indeed be legitimately lost and now found. Unfortunately, there's always room for human error in a recount involving 2.9 million ballots. But think for a second about what the spin would be on Fox News if the roles were reversed -- if Franken's team was currently behind, and boasting about newly-found votes coming in dribs and drabs.
Another interesting part of the trial is how Ginsberg has been crafting his taunts against the Franken campaign.
At two separate pressers today, Ginsberg ridiculed the Franken legal team for having warned last week that Al Franken's absence from the Senate was endangering the stimulus bill.
At the afternoon press conference, Ginsberg said that despite the dire warnings from the Franken people before the state Supreme Court, "the stimulus passed even without Al Franken being in the Senate today."
And at the evening presser, Ginsberg boasted that today, "the Democrats proved they can spend trillions without Al Franken."
(Press conferences c/o The Uptake.)
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
Well, this is troubling. I am fearing that this could go on for a long, long time at this point. The judges could have shut this fiasco down and they are refusing to do so, obviously. The appeal won't be long, but this bs currently going on could go on for months. Very, very troubling.
February 10, 2009 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Months? You're an optimist.
February 10, 2009 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I know. I keep getting hammered on that one. I am an optomist. I really don't understand why the judges aren't shutting this crap down. I thought by this point they would do that as I am sure that you remember from my prior posts. I don't get what is going on. It boggles the mind.
February 10, 2009 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
The judges just don't know how to get out of the mess they've created. They're used to trials. This isn't a trial - it's a filibuster. They're afraid of giving Coleman grounds for appeal and Coleman is using that to keep this going indefinitely. I've given up on them.
The best hope is for the MN-SC to rule that Franken should be given a provisional certificate. Failing that, the only alternative is for the state legislature to step in.
February 10, 2009 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are right, they have created a huge mess at this point and have lost control of the situation. Judges control trials all the time and limit evidence. Unfortunately, the coleman attorneys are actually doing a good job in avoiding that limitation.
You are right that it isn't a trial, it's a filibuster and the judges are allowing that to happen.
Maybe the solution is to throw it to the legislature. I guarantee that there are negotiations going on both there and between coleman and franken to try to resolve the situation. Coleman is just riding it out and filibustering until everyone says ok, we give and an appointment is made. Maybe they appoint ventura.
February 10, 2009 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think the MN legislature would allow Pawlenty to appoint someone. They'll act before then. It's looking more and more like that's what is going to have to happen.
February 10, 2009 6:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sorry, I meant everyone coming to some sort of agreement. There are intense negotiations going on behind the scenes that none of us know about. There is no way that paulenty would get to appoint without everyone agreeing on the appointee.
February 10, 2009 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
If you mean some compromise candidate, I don't see it. The Dems have a 2-to-1 majority in the legislature. Why would they agree to that when they can just vote to change the law and award Franken the certificate?
February 10, 2009 6:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pawlenty veto, which they can't override.
February 10, 2009 6:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmm...well, I see the DFL has an 46-21 majority in the Senate, but only a 87-47 majority in the House, so it's just short of veto-proof. They'd need two R's to flip.
February 10, 2009 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
That my friend is why your plan wasn't enacted months ago. I am sure pawlenty told the dems that he would veto and then they all would be screwed, so your plan wasn't put into place. It would give pawlenty a platform to slam the dem legislature and the dems would be whining about how the governor screwed them. That would not have been pretty.
I am guessing at this point that some compromise will have to be reached. It won't be coleman and it probably won't be franken. They will pick some third party caretaker to take the seat until 2010, or they will be litigating every vote until 2011.
February 10, 2009 6:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
The judges aren't shutting it down because Minnesota law doesn't allow them to shut it down. I'm a Franken supporter but if the counties find uncounted ballots before Minnesota law allows a winner to be certified, then they have to be counted.
February 10, 2009 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
True, I guess shut it down is improper terminology. What I mean is put some time limits on the situation. This will go on forever at this point and that was clearly not contempleted when these challenging statutes and such were enacted. They need to put a time limit on the trial and they are refusing to do so, which makes no sense and plays into coleman's favor.
February 10, 2009 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
So should they never award a certificate because there might some time, some day be more votes found? So far Coleman has found 12 ballots. Even if they break very favorably for him, that means he's gained about 3 net votes, which would be one per week of this filibuster. Even if he managed to continue to find ballots at the same rate (highly dubious), it would take more than four years to close the 215 vote gap.
There is more than enough legal reason to shut this down. Coleman has a right to his day in court, but he doesn't have a right to abuse that right by putting on a sham case. If you have a case you have an obligation to present it in a timely fashion or have your case tossed.
February 10, 2009 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Huh? I thought the election board did certify that Franken won by 225 votes, and Coleman sued to challenge that vote total. That is different than the SoS issuing a certificate, which isn't done until legal challenges are completed.
February 10, 2009 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't like this more than anyone else, but they have to let it go through the process -- however ugly that process may be. We got screwed in 2000 in some very similar circumstance; I don't want the courts to 'shut it down' and then have to endure the hypocrisy I'd no doubt feel. Franken will win in the end and take his seat.
February 10, 2009 9:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
But they could have spent more with him!!
Is the Franken team looking for stray votes in all counties? You can guffaw at seven whole votes, but when the spread was only 225, it's something to be wary of.
If he can get 4% of his 4800 ballots in question that 192 ballots in his favor, and then add in all of these "found" ballots and it starts to get interesting.
Where is Franken's PR/Spin guy? Does he have one? The longer this farce of a trial goes on the greater the chances Coleman's camp will steal it with shenanigans.
February 10, 2009 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
He should have hired one for the campaign and then maybe he wouldn't be only ahead by 225 votes, allegedly.
I agree the longer it goes on, the worse it looks. The judges have lost control of the situation at this point. We may be doing a redo in 2010.
February 10, 2009 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Franken's team botched this from the beginning, allowing the Coleman side to frame everything. Even Reid when he said he might seat Franken was allowed to be boxed in by the GOPer saying "Why not let the courts decide, he must be trying tricks because he doesn't have faith in the court system or knows Franken lost".
If the roles were reversed, Coleman would be a sitting senator by now. There would have been a huge PR offensive to get Franken to drop his challenge and the Senate GOP would have fought tooth and nail to seat Coleman. Of course Pawlenty would have helped things along as well.
February 10, 2009 6:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Coleman gets to frame everything because he's the plaintiff. Franken can only cross-examine at this point. However, I agree the judges fell for Coleman's tricks and have let the trial get away from them. Fortunately, tonight's order indicates they're wising up: http://minnesotaindependent.com/26111/court-to-coleman-and-franken-streamline
February 11, 2009 1:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmm, that brings to mind something I read recently in The Defining Moment, Jonathan Alter's book on FDR's first hundred days. I think this was in Roosevelt's first campaign for governor of New York. He knew that the longer it took the vote counts to come in from rural counties upstate, the more opportunity there would be for the Republicans to steal the election. He did something that had the effect of hurrying the county election boards along; unfortunately, I can't recall at the moment just what that was. And he won in a very close election.
I agree with you; the judges need to gain better control over this trial. The Coleman camp should not be allowed just to proceed at its leisure when it is in their interests (or at least the interests of those who are likely footing Coleman's bill) to draw things out as long as possible.
February 10, 2009 6:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Senate should seat Franken. Enough already, the Republicans have shown where they stand working in a bipartisan fashion (like it is a surprise) and if the situation were reversed, you can be damn sure Coleman would have been seated.
February 10, 2009 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Senate rules require a certificate. The R's could (and certainly would) filibuster any attempt to waive the rule, and a cloture vote on rule changes requires a 2/3 vote. Besides, this is Minnesota's problem. If they can't get their act together and certify a winner, why should the Senate solve their problem for them?
February 10, 2009 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, that is all true. I agree, but where does sanity come into play? Wow, I thought MN had it so together.
February 10, 2009 6:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
MBF has it right. This is the court's fault for not putting reasonable restrictions on the number of competing (and often contradictory) claims made by the Coleman camp, and by blocking the admission of further evidence at a point due to the urgency required in protecting the people of Minnesota's interest in having representation in the Senate.
I knew we were in trouble when they said to the parties "work it out amongst yourselves in good faith" several weeks back. If there is one thing the Coleman camp has consistently failed to demonstrate, it's good faith. Even so, it's up to the court to rule on the arguments and the evidence presented, and to be the final arbiter of what's in good faith and what's not.
February 10, 2009 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fox gets caught passing off GOP Talking points as their own reporting- http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/02/10/fox-passed-of-gop-talking_n_165720.html
The Senate Republican Communications Center press release contained a typo that Fox didn't catch and correct. So they can't even deny it anymore.
February 10, 2009 6:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
But they will anyway, deny it.
February 10, 2009 6:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cnn regurgitates them as well. The only one that doesn't, as far as I can tell, is msnbc. The rest of them just spew the propoganda as facts and "news." Pathetic.
February 10, 2009 6:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why hasn't not-so-nimble Norman not been indicted for "My-wife-earned-those-bribes-gate"?
February 10, 2009 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Allegedly the fbi put a hold on the investigation pending the outcome of the litigation. We're in a new era now where criminal investigations are not pursued when it would appear that they might be for political gain. Rove is no longer in the whitehouse. It's a new day in america.
February 10, 2009 7:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gotta link?
February 10, 2009 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I remember seeing it in the news recently. I could be wrong though. No warranties expressed or implied, that's why I said allegedly.
February 10, 2009 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I remember reading that the "Bristol Palin's future mother-in-law slinging drugs" investigation was held off during the election and the reason given was that the FBI didn't want the investigation to look political. I can't remember specifics, but there was another recent case where the FBI said it halted another investigation - it might have been the Coleman case now that I think about it.
February 10, 2009 8:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just checked on this case today and I don't know about the FBI aspect but Deep Blue Technology asked for and received 60 days so they can do an internal investigation on the matter. That's in the case where McKim is the plaintiff. Oh right, there are two of them.
Don't have time to provide a link right now but you can google it.
February 11, 2009 12:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh crap, I can't get that company's name right for anything. It's Deep Marine, and here is the link.
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/6248983.html
February 11, 2009 12:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not giving up on the MnSC just yet. In my experience, courts are more patient than observers, but ultimately there is a point at which they get really pissed off at a litigant who is wasting their time. It is one thing for a single superior court judge to lose control of a big media case and the whole thing spins out of control (Remember the OJ trial?) It's a whole other game, however, when you're talking about a state supreme court. They have other matters to attend to, and their caseload can't be just put off on other judges. I still cannot imagine that the judges will let Coleman individually litigate 5000 ballots. Just aint gonna happen.
February 10, 2009 9:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Looks to me like MNSC is slowly raising an anvil above the Coleman table in the court room. With every shit-eating move they make, the 10-ton anvil goes up another inch. It's reaching the apex at the pulley on the ceiling.
When the judges cut the rope, Coal Man will be crushed to dust. The attorneys will see it coming and step out of the way. But Norm will be smashed; his legion of loyalists (both of 'em) will reconstitute his undead body and slink up to Alaska.
Norm will build a still and sell corn liquor to alcholics. You know, just like he legislated. He's got that crazy moonshiner's look, don't he?
He will be crushed. 3-4 weeks tops. But he is of the undead. So beware.
February 11, 2009 1:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I expect that Franken has prepared some surprises of his own for Coleman. Remember that the Franken camp doesn't have to present its evidence until Coleman is done. And Franken seemed to do very well in mobilizing voters and collecting info after the election. They have 61 already as parties to the lawsuit, and I believe they have something like 700 ballots to present against Coleman's nit picking. It wouldn't surprise me if Franken's questionable ballots are 10x more productive than Coleman's.
This might come up soon. I read that the Court was trying to expedite things.
Does anyone know how many of the 4800 ballots Coleman has gone through so far to get his handful, not all of which will be accepted by the Court as valid?
February 11, 2009 1:50 AM | Reply | Permalink