Congratulations to Eric Kleefeld . . . the second most relieved man in America!

One national nightmare down, several to go. Get to work, Senator Franken.

stunned. Coleman did the right thing for once.

As excited as I am at the prospect of a Senator Franken, so long as Harriet "magic underwear" Reid is Majority Leader, Franken's assumption of Coal"man"'s senate seat won't amount to a hill of beans.

Primary Reid in 2010.

Hal-le-freakin- lujah. I never thought Slimy Norman would do the right thing even now.

/highfive Eric

Incoming character assassinations of Franken in 3....2....1

WHOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOO!!!

Senator Al Franken, every GOP Senator's worst nightmare! I can't wait! Senate Dems, your balls are on the way!!!

Just in time for the summer session: Waxman/Markey, confirming a Supreme Court Justice, Health Care reform (with a public option!), and EFCA! Let's go, Al!
And Eric, I second the motion on all your hard work- you put the MSM to shame.

Hurray Al! And good reporting Eric.

But "dirty comedian"? Why would you choose this adjective to describe Al Frankin? He is certainly no more blue than some of his contemporaries, whom I have never heard described in this way.

So Franken is seated next week. Byrd is out of the hospital. Where's Kennedy right now-- Washington or Florida?

Will we at any point before the August recess have 60 sitting Democratic senators? And is there anything we can expect to happen on the day that we do?

Thirty years after he originally declared it, at last, the decade of Al Franken!*

*Earlier this year some right-wing blogs were sneering about the "year" of Al Franken, but that's another thing about him they got wrong.

I sense a great disturbance in the Dark Side, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced.

Great job, Eric. Congratulations, Senator Franken!

We've just started a whole new ballgame, folks.

My only regret is I wish it could've came a month earlier. I moved to WI from MN a month ago! Damn!!

First of all, kudos to Eric for following this story and providing substantial analysis and understanding. Can we expect a book on the subject?

Second, between the time I started and finished reading the actual opinion, Coleman conceded, so I will spare y'all my analysis and summary of the opinion. I will state though, that although Minnesota citizens were done a substantial disservice by a law that prohibited the issuance of a certificate until after all challenges were completed, the rest of their election laws and judiciary have earned Minnesota a huge amount of respect and admiration. Their laws and implementation are fair, practical and transparent. The trial court and the S.Ct both did a wonderful job of evaluating the evidence and ruling on it based on clear, definable precedent, and presented their rulings in very understandable and fair memoranda.
I will still offer my final analysis of the case, for what it's worth.
1) It seems to me an unavoidable conclusion that Coleman's legal team was woefully unprepared and incompetent. The most basic requirements of trial practice are to know the relevant law, and then prove each element of the law with credible evidence. Coleman's team didn't know the laws, and didn't try to prove anything provable, and didn't support their irrelevant arguments with credible facts. Simply, it appears that Coleman's lawyers didn't know what they were supposed to be doing, and didn't have a credible plan for even doing what they attempted to do. I can't even say there was malicious intent to just delay the process (at least not a well-executed effort)because if that were the case, they could have delayed this MUCH, MUCH longer by actually offering and reviewing real evidence.
2) As bad as his legal team was, Coleman cannot sue them for malpractice, because he would have to prove damages against them, which would require him to prove he actually won the election, and there is nothing to support that claim. To the contrary, both the actual votes counted and the statistical modeling (by Nate Silver, especially)make is quite clear that more people actually voted for Franken.
The only thing Coleman might still argue is that he is entitled to the return of his legal fees, but since he's not footing the bill, I'm not sure he can even do that.

Goodbye and good riddance to this case and Coleman. Oh, and good luck with that pending indictment on illegal contributions.

This is good, but the idea that we have 60 votes on the Dem side of the aisle is a fantasy. The only issue on which that is the case would be, "Should all Democratic congresspersons be given raises." Other than that, expect nothing but defections. We're practically to the point where we've got a parliamentary set-up with multiple parties making coalitions.

What about Michael Jackson?

Yay Al! Thank you, Eric, for your outstanding reporting; should get you a George Polk Journalism award at least!

People have been talking about recognition and reward for you. I'm sure Josh will spring for:

- Suite at the Omni
- Dinner at the 1789 Restaurant
- After party at Blues Alley

Well done, Eric and TPM.

Josh, if you want to start a fund-raiser for Eric's Excellent Night Out, I'll kick in the first fifty bucks.

The Coleman team did not do a good job. But even if they had, there was no chance.

It became clear that the Obama campaign push for early votes and absentee votes significantly benefited Franken over Coleman. And more absentee ballots were all that were left to count.

The votes just weren't there for Coleman.

His shot-in-the dark legal strategy was rediculous. But on the other hand, there was no strategy that would have worked.

The facts on the ground just could not be changed.