Minnesota Trial Wraps Up -- But The Spin Keeps Going
With the major proceedings of the Minnesota trial now over -- the closing arguments have been done, and it's now in the three-judge panel's hands -- here are some other news items from the disputed race.
At a brief press conference held after the closing arguments were done, Norm Coleman commended his legal team, and discussed the importance of the issues at hand. "Whatever the outcome is, ultimately we'll get to a conclusion in this," said Norm. "But the bottom line is, people have a right to have their votes be counted."
A reporter asked Norm if he would appeal, in the event that he loses in this court. "Let's deal with this step right now," said Norm. "There are a lot of votes to be counted. There are still a lot of issues to be sorted." He then reiterated that he's not looking forward, but is focused on the issues present right now.
Coleman legal spokesman Ben Ginsberg continued to insist on the inaccuracies in the election system, and kept up the campaign's position that it might not be possible to certify any winner at all.
Ginsberg mentioned a line from Franken lawyer Kevin Hamilton's closing argument that Minnesota's election system works, and is one of the best in the country. "It is indeed," said Ginsberg. "But he really proved our point that as good as the Minnesota system is, it is not finely-calibrated enough to tell who won this election."
Meanwhile, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) told reporters this morning that he would encourage Coleman to pursue appeals all the way to the Supreme Court: "I would until we know who won."
McConnell also said of Coleman's Equal Protection claims: "We all remember Bush v. Gore."
Apparent Senator-elect Al Franken (D-Limbo) released this statement:
"I want to thank the court for the time and care it has devoted to hearing this case. And I want to thank my team for a job well done. Minnesotans have seen their election system put on trial over the past seven weeks, and we can all be proud of how it held up to the additional scrutiny of the three-judge panel. We will now await the judges' ruling and hope that those few voters whose ballots have been proven to be improperly rejected will have their votes counted. But at the end of this long process, I remain proud of our state's dedicated public servants, confident in the results of the election, and ready to get to work in Washington."
And finally, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) just released this statement, possibly in response to McConnell's remarks:
"The Minnesota courts' ruling deserves respect and five million citizens of Minnesota deserve full representation in the U.S. Senate as soon as possible. Norm Coleman wanted his day in court, and we respect that. He's gotten seven weeks. We all await the outcome from the three-judge panel."
Late Update: NRSC spokesman Brian Walsh just sent TPM this statement in response to Reid:
"As Senator Reid made clear numerous times throughout the Roland Burris controversy, the Senate rules are clear that no one can be seated without a valid election certificate. So we trust Senator Reid will continue to follow the rules of the Senate and the precedent that he set for himself earlier this year, and will only seek to seat the Senator from Minnesota, whether it's Norm Coleman or Al Franken, once a valid election certificate from the State of Minnesota has been issued declaring the winner."


















I have one question for Eric:
"Do you have an uncontrollable urge to pull every single hair out of your head?"
March 13, 2009 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nothing says "job security" like an open-ended project. I, for one, enjoy reading Eric's daily Franken-Coleman reports - It'll be nice to have Al in the Senate when all's said and done, but I'll definitely miss Eric spending a lot of time covering stories from my home state. Maybe Eric might consider doing an in-depth exposé on Michele Bachmann when he's finished with the Senate case.
March 13, 2009 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Eric deserves a better assignment - more depth and intelligence than Bachmann would offer.
Bachmann on the Daily Show would be a better fit. Jon speaks ridicule to buffoonery better than anyone.
March 13, 2009 7:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, Bachmann should be on the Colbert Report. She'd likely think Colbert was for real, and wouldn't know she was being sliced-and-diced.
March 13, 2009 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Minnesconsin,
You be 'da man! You be 'da man!
I can't wait for another video clip that unequivocally refutes her claim afterward, when she says they twisted her words and misrepresented her.
I really wished I hadn't lost my job so I could have afforded to move out of Blaine and into a district where I can be represented by someone with at least half of a brain.
March 13, 2009 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
True. True.
Of course, she could be sliced and diced by award winner Couric with deep and penetrating questions like "Which newspapers do you read?" or, "Isn't this nice weather we're having?". Worked with Palin.
March 13, 2009 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
... and then reversed when the Senate seated Mr. Burris without a certificate signed by the Illinois Secretary of State, thereby setting a precedent that actually supports the immediate seating of Senator-elect Franken.
March 13, 2009 6:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Minnesota SCt said that, as far as they were concerned, the US Senate can seat Al whenever they want, without a certificate of election.
March 16, 2009 9:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Brian Walsh, NRSC: "As Senator Reid made clear numerous times throughout the Roland Burris controversy, the Senate rules are clear that no one can be seated without a valid election certificate."
(Sigh!) And we ALL know how much Republicans respect rules and the rule of law ...
March 13, 2009 10:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Republican Uncertainty Principle:
Close election and we're ahead, we win on Equal Protection grounds.
Close election and we're behind, the election is too close to call and we need a new election on Equal Protection and Due Process grounds.
I have a dog. I love my dog. My dog loves to play. Today Coleman's attorney,Joe Friedberg, gave his my-dog-told-me-I-didn't-have-to-do-my-homework-so-we-should-go-out-and-play argument. My dog loves this argument, but the law required Friedberg to build his case on evidence, which, sadly for Coleman, he did not do.
March 13, 2009 11:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
My dog gives me that argument all of the time. And she always wins.
Was Bush v Gore about equal protection? I thought it was that Fox News called Florida for Bush and the Supremes thought that sounded right to them. I recall the Bushies claimed that continuing the recount would do irreparable harm to GW Bush so it just must be stopped. I was running two businesses at the time so I didn't pay any closer attention. What was that shitty mess really about besides the Republican appointees deciding to screw the country?
If anybody can straighten me out on that I would appreciate it. Now I've got my curiosity piqued. Of course I could Google it but it's just more fun here.
March 14, 2009 5:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
Burris and Franken cases have little in common - Burris was an appointment from a dirty Governor, Franken was elected by Minnesota, and will have been deemed the winner by the election board and the court.
Of course the GOP can always hide behind "We're just following the law, the Dems are trying to circumvent it. Mr. Coleman deserves to appeal his case and see it through all of the courts. If the Dems are so worried about Minnesota having two Senators, Gov. Pawlenty would gladly name one for the interim."
March 13, 2009 11:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
We will have a decision in about a week. These judges are very much aware that the courts from where the came miss them, and they need to get back. They will not take long. One prediction that I have is that the Court will concentrate on the *process* about how things are done carefully, legally, and thoughtfully, if not perfectly. The process has got us this far, and Al Franken wins.
March 14, 2009 12:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
Amazing:
"Ginsberg mentioned a line from Franken lawyer Kevin Hamilton's closing argument that Minnesota's election system works, and is one of the best in the country. 'It is indeed,' said Ginsberg. 'But he really proved our point that as good as the Minnesota system is, it is not finely-calibrated enough to tell who won this election.'"
To paraphrase: The system works and that proves that it doesn't work.
March 14, 2009 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Quick, Quimby, demand to see Franken's birth certificate!
March 14, 2009 1:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha! Good one!
March 14, 2009 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink