Franken Lawyer: Coleman Accuses Us Of Disenfranchising People He's Thrown Out!
During the Minnesota trial this morning, the Franken legal team has continued to hammer Norm Coleman for reversing his position on counting rejected absentee ballots -- so much so that he's asking for specific envelopes to be counted that he had successfully thrown out before.
Franken lawyer David Lillehaug has been cross-examining Dakota County elections manager Kevin Boyle, using the questioning as a vehicle to make this larger point. Lillehaug reviewed a Web page that the Coleman campaign has put up, posting the names and home counties of all the thousands of rejected absentee voters for whom they're now advocating:
The page declares: "Check below to see if you are one of the thousands of Minnesotans the Franken campaign is seeking to disenfranchise."
Lillehaug then had Boyle confirm that there are ten individuals on the Dakota County list alone whose ballots were deemed by Boyle's office to have been wrongly rejected and would have been counted -- except the Coleman campaign vetoed them, under the decision by the state Supreme Court that gave the campaigns a veto over improperly-rejected absentees.
"And according to this exhibit, these are the people that Norm Coleman is suggesting the Franken campaign is seeking to disenfranchise?" Lillehaug asked rhetorically.
Meanwhile, there is some hope that these proceedings could speed up soon. The three-judge panel has ordered the campaigns to file briefs arguing in clear terms whether they regard specific categories of rejected absentee votes as having been legally cast and worthy of counting -- for example, if a voter gave a different address on the ballot return envelope versus what was on their application form.
The court will be hearing oral arguments on these categories tomorrow afternoon, and could come down with some solid rulings on what kinds of votes will or won't get in.
This wouldn't, however, definitively answer the questions of whether individual ballots will be included. Even with established categories, there will still be plenty of room to argue over whether a ballot qualifies for the category. But it will at least set the terms of the debate, and that can go a long way towards making this easier.
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
The whole system sucks, truly.
February 11, 2009 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Norm Coleman sucks, truly.
February 11, 2009 12:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Coleman should have made these changes when he was Senator if he felt they were unfair. Of course he didn't give a rats ass about it until it matters to him. You can't retroactively change the criteria for rejected ballots.
Funny with the stimulus all but signed by Obama, the judges decide to start taking steps to speed up the trial.
February 11, 2009 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I wouldn't go that far. They may have to to recess the trial later this week because one of them has to check his e-mail, while another has to see his granddaughter's pre-school President's Day pageant where she'll be all dolled up like a miniature Mary Todd Lincoln.
February 11, 2009 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
This goes exactly to the point that I had made yesterday. I'm still not clear how the judges are allowing the Coleman camp to continue with their blatant hypocrisy. How can the Coleman camp be allowed to argue that they now want ballots counted that they previously rejected?
I've kept a certain level of self-assurance that Minnesota common-sense would kick-in at a certain points and the judges would say "enough" and call and end to this, but that's been fading over the last couple of weeks.
February 11, 2009 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I had the same self-assurance about MN common sense. I believe I am over that now.
February 11, 2009 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Norman's not a Minnesotan - he's from Noo Yawk.
February 11, 2009 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
One can only assume they are giving Coleman all the rope he wants so he can hang himself. Also, I suspect by giving him all the time he wants to parade all his evidence if their judgment goes against him and he decides to take it to the next level, the record will show the panel bent over backwards to accommodate him, but he failed to show injury. Nothing like seeing a court take the extra effort and go one more mile just to make sure an appeal will find no evidence they short change Coleman's efforts.
February 11, 2009 1:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. You know that once Coleman loses here, that he's going to take it to SCOTUS.
"Minnesota common sense" would dictate that the three-judge panel avoid doing anything that could be used as a substantive basis for appeal.
Cross those "T's" and dot those "i's"...and force Coleman to hang his hat on arguments so flimsy that even Scalia et. al couldn't bring themselves to reverse.
February 11, 2009 2:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Except that by the time the trial is over and he "loses" it will be several years from now.
February 11, 2009 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
When all is said and done, Minnesotans can only pray that "Minnesota" doesn't replace "Florida" as the pejorative for "screwed up election process".
February 11, 2009 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
When all is said and done, Minnesotans can only pray that "Minnesota" doesn't replace "Florida" as the pejorative for "screwed up election process".
February 11, 2009 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Harry Reid and the Senate- Hello? Could you help out a bit here? I know you don't want to look like you are interfering but MN residents like myself want a second senator. Could you start pressuring Coleman and the Republicans with their continued obstruction on this matter.
By doing nothing all you do is continue to raise money for Coleman and NRC. Heckuva job!
February 11, 2009 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Give it up. Harry Reid does not have the power to waive Senate rules. That takes a vote of the Senate. Republicans can (and most assuredly would) filibuster, and cloture votes on waiving Senate rules take a 2/3 vote, not 3/5. Not. Gonna. Happen.
Besides, this is Minnesota's problem. If Minnesota can't get its act together and certify a winner, why should the Senate solve their problem for them?
If you want your second Senator, start pressuring the state legislature to change the law. You'll need at least three Republicans in the House to vote with you, though, or Pawlenty will just veto it. Failing that, you'd better start leaning on the MN-SC to end this farce.
February 11, 2009 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's the Senate's problem too, to say nothing of Organized Labor's problem. They are going to need Al's vote, see below.
February 11, 2009 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd say it's primarily Minnesota's problem, but it's all moot because there's really not a lot the Senate can do about it. What can they possibly do to pressure Coleman?
It looks to me like your best hope is the MN-SC, and that doesn't look all that hopeful. Like a lot of people, I thought this panel would recognize that time mattered and they would conduct a reasonably expeditious trial. It turns out they're more worried about being overturned on appeal. Paradoxically, if, by some twist of fate, Coleman wins, they'd have just provided Franken with a treasure trove of grounds for appeal.
February 11, 2009 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's infuriating. I donated time and money only for infinite delays. As for what the Senate can do, I don't know- I'm assuming they could do more than they are right now- which is nothing. If nothing else it would be nice to know they have his back.
I pray (since that's about all I have left) that the SC comes through. Changing the law would be great (the MN system worked fine until this appeal- this loophole has to change), but wouldn't help out too much right now.
I have a feeling it's going to be a long spring into summer.
February 11, 2009 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't imagine what pressure the Senate could bring to bear. They just don't have any leverage. The MN legislature probably isn't going to be any help, since the House is 3 votes short of a veto-proof majority, and any bill to certify Franken would probably be vetoed by Pawlenty. Unless you can get 3 Republicans to cross over, that door's closed.
I don't think anyone (even Coleman) thought that the panel would allow Coleman to abuse the system this way. Once he figured out that they can be played, he's obviously just going to keep this going indefinitely. I think your best hope may be the MN-SC. Barring that, it's a stalemate.
February 11, 2009 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have a question though, why does every article on Franken always include something to the effect of "and the Senate may go ahead and attempt to seat Franken anyways if this drags out to long" ?
And, how long is long enough?
February 11, 2009 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Harry Reid and the Senate- Hello? Could you help out a bit here? I know you don't want to look like you are interfering but MN residents like myself want a second senator. Could you start pressuring Coleman and the Republicans with their continued obstruction on this matter.
By doing nothing all you do is continue to raise money for Coleman and NRC. Heckuva job!
February 11, 2009 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just don't understand how the state goes without representation... when this lawsuit could be dragged out for the entirety of the senators term? If I were a citizen of MN, I would be furious and I would want Coleman tossed out on his behind for putting self interest above the interest of the people he claims to want to serve!
February 11, 2009 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Further more, there are other costs for Franken being held up, from Greg Sargent:
"...here’s a bit of an interesting wrinkle re the Employee Free Choice fight: A well connected labor official explains that one reason the major unions are in a holding pattern on Employee Free Choice, and aren’t yet pushing their campaign for it, is that they’re waiting for some kind of resolution to the Al Franken-Norm Coleman Minnesota Senate standoff. The idea, the labor official says, is that the political and legislative strategy might be different if and when it’s certain that Franken will be seated and Dems will be one Senate vote closer to the magic number of 60."
http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/labor/hilda-solis-to-get-vote-today/#respond
Get your ass in gear, Senate. They can pressure even if they can't seat Al.
February 11, 2009 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
The MN SC still has not ruled on Franken's request for an order giving him the provisional election certificate. That tells me that they are thinking about it.
February 11, 2009 2:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's a longshot possibility that the briefs the Judges requested both to file regarding the groups of ballots that each figure should be counted could be used to seat Franken provisionally if Coleman is still unwilling to pare down his own overall number of ballots.
February 11, 2009 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink