The Minnesota Senate Election Contest and Related Matters

16. A spokesman for Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid says it "appears" Franken won the Canvas and Democrat Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota says that Franken should be seated. Minnesota's Pioneer Press sums up the situation: "We see this as a three-act drama. If, by this time next week, Al or Norm is declared the winner of the recount - that is, at the end of Act II but before Act III - there will be a rush to put that man in the seat immediately. We could imagine a scenario where the Democratically controlled U.S. Senate would be happy to do this if Franken maintains his margin. That would be a slap in the face to Minnesota fairness. State law includes the right of an election contest. Seating either man while that is pending will be seen as a partisan power play that breaks faith with the spirit of the law. A court contest need not be drawn out but it is the candidate's right. Norm and Al can cool their heels until it's over." Editorial, Pioneer Press, http://www.twincities.com/opinion/ci_11338324.

17. Incoming National Republican Senatorial Committee Chair Texas Senator John Cornyn puts it better: "Al Franken is falsely declaring victory based on an artificial lead created on the back of the double counting of ballots. His campaign's actions in the last several days on the issues of rejected absentee ballots are creating additional chaos and disorder in the Minnesota recount. Those actions, coupled with the recent comments by Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, who suggests seating someone even if there is an election contest, are unprecedented. Minnesotans will not accept a recount in which some votes are counted twice, and I expect the Senate would have a problem seating a candidate who has not duly won an election." http://www.politico.com/blogs/scorecard/1208/Cornyn_Franken_camp_promoting_chaos.html.

18. More on "wrongly" rejected Absentee Ballots. "But both the Franken and Coleman campaign requested that additional ballots be included. In large part, the inclusion of those has been rejected. Fritz Knaak, lead Coleman recount attorney, said the rules of the recount, which the campaign had agreed to, aren't playing out the way the campaign expected. He said that different standards are being applied in different counties, resulting in confusion. So the campaign asked the court to demand that local officials send all the mistakenly rejected absentee ballots identified by local officials, the Coleman campaign or the Franken campaign to state offices for sorting." http://www.twincities.com/politics/ci_11346295.

19. From a letter from Coleman Attorney Tony Trimble: "All of us have spent countless hours reviewing in excess of 12,000 absentee ballot envelopes. By Christmas Eve an agreement (the ‘Protocol') was produced expressly requiring the Franken and Coleman campaigns to submit two (2) cooperatively-prepared lists to the Secretary of State and the county/city election officials: (i) one list specifying absentee ballot envelopes to be opened and counted, and (ii) another list specifying absentee ballot envelopes remaining in dispute. (Section 11 and Section 15 of Protocol). The required lists have not resulted.
"Instead, a subtle form of political guerilla warfare has arisen. Confusing and inconsistent directives and demands have confounded our county/city election officials. Differing standards of acceptance and rejection has resulted, and will multiply today and Friday unless changed now. Inconsistent ballot review and counting is the injury suffered by Minnesota and our voters. The blatant and baseless wholesale rejection of ballots for political gain is what we are seeing now, and it is not what we are supposed to be doing under the Supreme Court's order.
"Presently, the fates of more than 2,000 votes are at risk and ‘in play'. We should all stop what we're doing and wisely play by the rules we all adopted in order to achieve a valid election result. In order to achieve the consistency demanded by the Supreme Court and deserved by Minnesotans, we propose that: the envelopes and supporting materials for any and all absentee ballots identified by the Franken campaign, the Coleman campaign, the Secretary of State and the county and local election officials be sent to the Secretary of State's office by Friday. At that time, the campaigns and the Secretary of State will review the materials and determine pursuant to the Supreme Court's order which absentee ballots were indeed wrongly rejected. Those ballots will then be counted by the Canvassing Board at its scheduled meeting." [Full letter available at http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/ColemanSOSLetter12312008Letter.pdf.

20. As usual, the pro-Franken Star Tribune screws things up. "The Coleman campaign's court petition underscored the irony that the campaigns have largely traded positions on counting additional votes. For weeks, while Coleman held an unofficial lead, it was the Franken campaign that daily decried the danger of disenfranchising voters. Now, with Franken ahead, it is Coleman's troops who are mainly calling for more rejected ballots to be considered. Coleman's aim is "bringing in ballots that were wrongly excluded," attorney Knaak said Wednesday. "I heard it a hundred times from the Franken campaign." In addition to the 1,346 absentee ballots already identified by counties as wrongly rejected, the Coleman campaign in recent days has asked counties to review another 654 rejected absentee ballots that may be legitimate. Some counties have agreed to the request, while others have not. Franken campaign officials also have sought to have a smaller number of absentee ballots added to the list, even though they said this week that they were satisfied with the local officials' list. Knaak said in a statement that the Coleman campaign's action was prompted by concerns that a county-by-county review of the wrongly rejected ballots was resulting in the emergence of "a subtle form of political guerrilla warfare." It was inconsistent to review only those absentee ballots judged wrongly rejected by local officials, Knaak said, and leave out, in some but not all cases, other ballots questioned by the campaigns." http://www.startribune.com/templates/Print_This_Story?sid=36953744

21. Franken and thus the Star Tribune has claimed that Coleman is being inconsistent. In reality both sides are being consistent. Franken is continuing to look to disenfranchise Minnesotians who did not vote for him. Coleman is continuing to try to follow the rules so all legal votes are counted. Coleman's position is a result of the decisions of the Minnesota Supreme Court and the Canvasing Board. Originally Coleman statements were based on the Democrat Attorney General's position following the law and having allegedley wrongly rejected absentee ballots reviewed by a court during the contest phase. Now that the law is not be followed or has been changed, Coleman's campaign is trying to ensure that ALL wrongly rejected ballots are counted now. Thus Coleman has always been for counting all legal votes while Franken has always been for counting only his votes.

22. Predictably the Ritchie led Secretary of State's Office Board took the Franken campaigns position and likely disenfranchised hundreds of voters from other non-pro Franken parts of the state. "The tallying was performed under order from the state Supreme Court, which gave the state until today to finish the count and the state canvassing board until Tuesday to certify the results. Under the order, both campaigns, as well as local officials, had veto power over which ballots the state counted. Last week, the Coleman campaign said it wanted more absentee ballots considered than counties or the Franken campaign had allowed. It asked the court to revise its order so that all absentee ballots either campaign believed were wrongfully rejected would be sent to the state, rather than just the 933 both campaigns had agreed to. There would be 2,070 ballots in that pile. On Friday, the court ordered the Franken campaign, local officials and the other parties to provide it more information about how the ballots were selected, but it did not order the process stopped." http://www.twincities.com/ci_11364794, Registration may be required.

23. How a Court could easily reverse the canvassing board's pro-Franken decisions. "He stands to lose as many as 110 net votes if the court were to take Coleman's side on the duplicate ballot issue. Coleman's lawyers could also make an issue of the loss of 133 ballots in Minneapolis, which the Canvassing Board resolved by using the election night count for that precinct. If Coleman were to prevail on that, Franken would lose 46 votes." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123102477166351591.html

24. Some details of a potential election contest: "The standards for accepting or rejecting absentee ballots are fodder for either candidate in a lawsuit, and Foley predicted that a lawsuit could also make use of issues that so far have received little or no attention. . . . Any lawsuit would go to a three-judge panel to be appointed by state Supreme Court Chief Justice Eric Magnuson. What's not clear is whether Magnuson would make the appointments himself, or delegate the decision since he served on the Canvassing Board. When the 1962 Minnesota governor's race went to a recount and then a lawsuit, the chief justice at the time ordered the two campaigns to mutually agree on the makeup of the three-judge panel. State law requires that a trial start within 20 days of a lawsuit being filed. The burden of proof would fall on the candidate who filed the challenge, who would have to provide evidence that the Canvassing Board declared the wrong guy the winner of the recount. Lawyers for the other candidate would be given time at the trial to refute claims brought by their adversaries. It's difficult to predict what twists and turns the trial could bring. "Everything really kind of goes back to zero," said Brian Rice, a Minneapolis attorney who's worked on more than a dozen recounts in local Minnesota races. . . . But the 1962 recount gives a hint that it won't happen too quickly: In that case, the three-judge panel didn't declare a winner until March 21, 1963. Even that wouldn't necessarily end the process. The loser of a lawsuit could appeal to the state Supreme Court, and legal concepts such as equal protection already raised by both campaigns could provide footing for federal appeals." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123102477166351591.html

25. Why the rush to seat Franken? Do you think Democrats are worried about an Election Contest and how it will expose Ritchie's disenfranchisement of Coleman voters and allowing Franken votes to count twice? Former Democrat Senate Campaign Committee Chair and incoming Senate Rules Chair Charles Schumer of New York was quoted: "With the Minnesota recount complete, it is now clear that Al Franken won the election ... and while there are still possible legal issues that will run their course, there is no longer any doubt who will be the next Senator from Minnesota," Schumer said. "With the Senate set to begin meeting on Tuesday to address the important issues facing the nation, it is crucial that Minnesota's seat not remain empty, and I hope this process will resolve itself as soon as possible." http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gMpTmr96V5hKIfyHT4Av4jsVQgrQD95GM4HG1

26. Schumer should recuse himself from any Senate Rules Committee hearings on the race. "Sen. John Cornyn, the chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, called Schumer's comments premature and troubling, since Schumer is the new chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, which has jurisdiction over contested elections. "Senator Schumer will likely play a key role in determining who ultimately assumes this Senate seat," Cornyn said. "Pre-judging the outcome while litigation is still pending calls into question his ability to impartially preside over this matter when it comes before the Committee, as it most certainly will." [ http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gMpTmr96V5hKIfyHT4Av4jsVQgrQD95GM4HG1

27. A leading Minnesota based Republican blogger explains why Coleman must challenge the election results. "I start this post from the premise that U.S. Senator Norm Coleman was re-elected by the voters of Minnesota on November 4th, 2008. Along with numerous Minnesotans, I absolutely believe the Coleman received more votes than Franken on election day and that Coleman should be getting to work today on the start of his second term as a U.S. Senator. But due to reasons listed below, Minnesota won't have two U.S. Senators at the start of the 111th Congress. I believe the decisions of the State Canvassing Board have been inconsistent and the entire recount process flawed and for the good of Minnesota, Coleman should formally contest the recount process in court. Here are my reasons: #1 "Newly discovered" ballots from Maplewood that were found weeks after the election. . . . #2 "Missing ballots" supposedly tallied on election night that could not be found during the recount process. . . .#3 "Double counting" of original and duplicate ballots of the same voter. . . . #4 "Wrongly rejected" absentee ballots. Team Franken and the Secretary of State Mark Ritchie's office came up with a list of about 1,350 potentially wrongly rejected absentee ballots. . . .The bottom line is that the recount has shown how flawed the election process is in Minnesota and a legal challenge to the recount process will provide further important analysis on how we can strengthen the integrity of our elections. Team Franken is filled with east-coast transplants and Washington D.C. staffers who parachuted into Minnesota to work on Franken's campaign. I don't believe they have any credible connection to Minnesotan and therefore won't concern themselves with Minnesota voters being disenfranchised. They will trample the rights of voters without any hesitation to get Franken seated in the U.S. Senate. As a proud Minnesotan concerned about election integrity, I believe it is critical that Senator Coleman challenge the recount in court." [For the complete post go to: http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2009/01/05/for-the-sake-of-minnesota-senator-coleman-should-challenge-the-recount-in-court/

28. The Wall Street Journal also has a great editorial, a brief excerpt: "Strange things keep happening in Minnesota, where the disputed recount in the Senate race between Norm Coleman and Al Franken may be nearing a dubious outcome. Thanks to the machinations of Democratic Secretary of State Mark Ritchie and a meek state Canvassing Board, Mr. Franken may emerge as an illegitimate victor. Mr. Franken started the recount 215 votes behind Senator Coleman, but he now claims a 225-vote lead and suddenly the man who was insisting on "counting every vote" wants to shut the process down. He's getting help from Mr. Ritchie and his four fellow Canvassing Board members, who have delivered inconsistent rulings and are ignoring glaring problems with the tallies. . . . The question is how the board can certify a fair and accurate election result given these multiple recount problems. Yet that is precisely what the five members seem prepared to do when they meet today. Some members seem to have concluded that because one of the candidates will challenge the result in any event, why not get on with it and leave it to the courts? Mr. Coleman will certainly have grounds to contest the result in court, but he'll be at a disadvantage given that courts are understandably reluctant to overrule a certified outcome. . . . Minnesotans like to think that their state isn't like New Jersey or Louisiana, and typically it isn't. But we can't recall a similar recount involving optical scanning machines that has changed so many votes, and in which nearly every crucial decision worked to the advantage of the same candidate. The Coleman campaign clearly misjudged the politics here, and the apparent willingness of a partisan like Mr. Ritchie to help his preferred candidate, Mr. Franken. If the Canvassing Board certifies Mr. Franken as the winner based on the current count, it will be anointing a tainted and undeserving Senator. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123111967642552909.html#printMode

29. Even the leading paper in Minnesota, the Pro-Franken Star Tribune agrees this race is not over in an editorial: "Coleman is justified in going to court. . . . [A]s several of the judges who sit on the board pointed out during their proceedings, there's only so much that an administrative, vote-counting body can do. The Canvassing Board lacked the authority to order county election officials to act. It could not conduct evidentiary hearings, take testimony or make findings of fact. Courts alone have the legal standing to do those things. That makes the judicial branch best suited to pass judgment on which remaining rejected absentee ballots should be counted. The courts can better determine whether some ballots were double-counted, as the Coleman campaign claims. They can better decide how or whether the 133 [allegedly] missing ballots in Minneapolis should be counted. Both Franken and Coleman should want court-ordered answers to questions that the Canvassing Board could not answer. The winner of this contest deserves the legitimacy that would come with a court's politically independent finding that he got more votes than his opponent. The loser deserves to know that every legal ballot was counted and that he came up short." http://www.startribune.com/templates/Print_This_Story?sid=37117484

30. A local Minnesota writer brings up the ACORN angle: "The corruption we just witnessed is ideological in nature, a corruption of privilege and responsibility. Secretaries of state, like Ritchie, have become powerful players in elections. By encouraging more voting and making it sound virtuous and noble to do so, the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, for example, brought into the fold more and more uninterested and disengaged bodies, cheapening the votes of the legitimate lot of us who vote correctly and responsibly." http://www.twincities.com/ci_11389081?IADID=Search-www.twincities.com-www.twincities.com

31. Senator Reid's extreme partisanship is showing in that he is determined that Coleman not be seated even before the process is finished. He is even more partisan then the number two Democrat in the Senate. Reid said: "Norm Coleman will never ever serve [again] in the Senate"

32. "It was not so much a recount as a one-sided do-over. But since it took place behind the scenes, and since the comedian loosed the standard Democratic cry of "let every vote count," nobody got upset. . . . Speaking of "never, ever," those were also Mr. Reid's precise words recently on the possibility of Mr. Coleman returning to the Senate. The majority leader has been temporarily thwarted in his Franken ambitions, which means he's grumpy, which makes him dangerous. Be prepared for Democrats to spend the next weeks laying the groundwork to delegitimize Mr. Coleman's challenge, no matter what the results. After all, none of this is about the law. It's all about appearances." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123146235159366501.html#printMode

33. What is the difference between Burris and Franken to Reid? According to Kim Strassel of the Wall Street Journal: "Put another way, Democrats were only too happy to install an unpleasant "comedian" with a dubious victory, while turning away a law-abiding Illinois official with a legal appointment. Scandal aside, Mr. Reid was focused on the political numbers. Confident he'd get some Democratic senator out of Illinois, he didn't mind turning Mr. Burris away. He's far less sure about Minnesota, and in a rush to legitimize Mr. Franken. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123146235159366501.html#printMode

34. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is determined to stop Coleman from not only pursuing his rights but even helping the people of Minnesota. This is the latest outrage from Reid regarding Senator Coleman. "In a telephone interview Friday, Coleman said Reid had initially agreed to let his staff take 60 days from the end of his term, which was Saturday, to wrap up 400 open cases. . . . "There are people - this is real-life stuff - who come to us for help," Coleman said of the open cases. "They're being hurt by Harry Reid." . . . According to Coleman, Reid had agreed to let the staff members work under the direction of the secretary of the Senate, but backed out of the deal this week. The staff would not have been under Coleman's direction, the former senator stressed. Reid spokesman Jim Manley said in an e-mail that there couldn't have been such a deal in place, "as the Senate cannot allow staff to do constituent work if they are not under the supervision of a senator, and Norm Coleman is no longer a senator." But in a subsequent e-mail, Manley said, "We are working hard to reach an acceptable solution." (See "Coleman says Reid reneged on staff deal but majority leader denies making act to let office finish constituent projects," St. Paul Pioneer Press, Jan. 10, 2009.) Let it be said that all Capitol Hill veterans know that in such situation the office is turned over to the Senate Sergeant at Arms.

35. Now Franken has decided to ignore the will of the people of Minnesota and their laws and try again to be selected as Senator. An attempt so brazen that even Mark Ritchie is refusing. "Democrat Al Franken was quickly turned down Monday when he asked Minnesota's governor and secretary of state to issue an election certificate that would let him take office in the Senate. In letters the campaign sent to Republican Gov. Tim Pawlenty and Democratic Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, Franken's lawyers argued that a seven-day waiting period for issuing the certificate after an election has passed and he should get the signed certificate. . . . Minnesota law prevents officials from issuing an election certificate until legal matters are resolved. . . . "Minnesota law is very clear on when a certificate of election can be issued. Neither the governor nor I may sign a certificate of election in the U.S. Senate race until all election contests have reached a final determination," Ritchie's statement read." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/12/franken-campaign-asks=for_n_157155.html?view=print.

36. Franken and his allies at the Democrat Farmer Labor Party in their continuing effort to distract the media from the upcoming election contest may have even filed an FEC complaint against the RNLA. See RNLA's response here.

37. "In an unusual move, Kyl went to the Senate floor this morning to lay out all the reasons why the Minnesota Senate election remains unresolved, and he listed Sen. Norm Coleman's arguments before the Minnesota courts. Coleman's election lawsuit contends there are newly discovered ballots, missing ballots, wrongly rejected absentee ballots and double counting of votes. "Clearly there's something wrong here and it has to be resolved by court," Kyl said. "There are no stipulations for when proceedings must be completed. Estimations are that it could take a month or more." http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17384.html

38. Franken continues to try to make up the rules as he goes along. It is unlikely that the Minnesota Courts will allow this as the Minnesota Canvassing Board did. "On Monday, Franken argued that a Coleman court challenge should be limited to the awarding of already certified ballots and a mathematical recount for accuracy. But Franken and the Supreme Court earlier appeared to envision that a court could conduct a broader review. When Coleman wanted local and state elections officials to review his claims that some voters were counted twice and that absentee ballots were wrongly rejected, Franken argued those issues were better left for a court contest. "This is precisely the sort of allegation that is left for consideration in an election contest, where evidence may be gathered and presented, witnesses may be heard (and cross examined) and fact-finding may occur," the Franken campaign said in a court memo last month that argued against the state Canvassing Board considering claims of double-voting." [Emphasis added, http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/37523294.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUT.

39. Franken is desperate to stop a full review of the election in a court run election contest. Why? It is obvious he fears a proper election contest would change the recount result. "The two-pronged strategy seeks to pave the way for the Senate to seat Franken provisionally while limiting Coleman to a narrow court challenge, rather than the more sweeping review he seeks of absentee ballots, claims of double-counting and other irregularities." http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/37523294.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUT.

40. RNLA's efforts to keep pressure on the Senate to follow Minnesota law and to not seat a Senator until all election contests are complete are made more important in light of Franken's continuing efforts to be seated before the process is complete: "The Senate, Franken's argument goes, is the judge of its membership, so Minnesota cannot bar him from getting the certificate." (See “Franken asks court to clear way into senate”, St. Paul Pioneer Press, January 14, 2009.

41. A noted Minnesota legal scholar declares the Minnesota recount was "unconstitutional." In an opinion printed in the Wall Street Journal on 1/15/09, former Associate Dean and current U. Minn. Law School professor Michael Stokes Paulsen writes "But as matters stand now, the Minnesota recount is a legal train wreck. The result, a narrow Franken lead, is plainly invalid. Just as in Bush v. Gore, the recount has involved "unequal evaluation of ballots in several respect" and failed to provide "minimal procedural safeguards" of equal treatment of all ballots. Legally, it does not matter which candidate benefited from all these differences in treatment. (Mr. Franken did.) The different treatment makes the results not only unreliable (and suspicious), but unconstitutional." http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123197800446483619.html

42. Franken continues to go out on uncharted legal waters, arguing to the 3 judge panel today that Minnesota law and the US Constitution prevent Coleman from the right to a full contest of the election and recount results. According to the Star Tribune, "Some legal observers are skeptical about Franken's chances of prevailing on his motion because they say state law appears to allow a vigorous challenge of the Canvassing Board results and because they believe the panel will take its direction from the Minnesota Supreme Court, which gave Coleman the option of bringing some of those claims to court after the recount." Franken filed a separate brief Tuesday arguing that the Minnesota Supreme Court should order the Governor and the Secretary of State to certify him as the winner. The Star Tribune notes that "The Coleman campaign and some nonpartisan legal experts say state law prevents the governor and the secretary of state from issuing an election certificate if a lawsuit is filed within seven days of when the Canvassing Board certifies election results; Coleman sued a day after the board action." http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/37910114.html?elr=KArks8c7PaP3E77K_3c::D3aDhUxWoW_oD:EaDUiacyKUnciaec8O7EyU

43. Coleman stated: "I certainly wish that I was ahead in votes rather than behind right now, but I believe in the end we'll be where we were on Election Night. That I will be ahead. . . . Nobody's vote should be counted twice and every vote that should be counted hopefully will get a chance to be counted in this process. I think all Minnesotans will be served by that. You can't hold office if people think that somebody else's vote was double-counted or your vote wasn't considered." http://kstp.com/article/stories/S754490.shtml?cat=89

44. The extreme partisanship of Secretary of State Ritchie and Franken strategy to disenfranchise some voters (i.e. those from Republican areas) while allowing virtually identical ballots from Democrat areas to count seems to bear fruit. Although Minnesota law and Ritchie's own office handbook is clear that rejected Absentee ballots are only to be reviewed and possibly counted during an Election Contest, by counting those that Franken requested and ignoring those that Coleman requested, Ritchie may have delivered the election for Franken as the court is seemingly reluctant to do their job. "The judges denied Coleman's bid to conduct an expansive new inspection of ballots around the state for evidence that many were improperly counted or wrongly rejected during the recount. . . . Coleman's lawyers argued Friday that those ballots resembled 933 others that were eventually accepted by the Canvassing Board." Coleman, unlike Franken or Ritchie, will continue to fight so that Minnesotans are not wrongly disenfranchised: "After the hearing, the Coleman campaign filed a class-action lawsuit in behalf of the roughly 11,000 absentee voters whose ballots were rejected, arguing that their votes should be given the same consideration as the 933 approved by the Canvassing Board." http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/38235094.html?page=1&c=y

45. Reid's blatant attempt to "appoint" Franken "senator by his party's leadership rather than the voters of his state" has drawn the ire of the Moorhead, MN Forum editorial board. Says the editorial board, "Al Franken should allow Minnesota election law to run its course before he assumes a seat in the U.S. Senate is his. A campaign to seize the seat before state courts finish their work is unseemly at best, arrogant at worst." http://www.inforum.com/event/article/id/228782/group/home/

46. RNLA today sent a letter to Senate Majority Leader Reid and Senate Republican Leader McConnell demanding that Franken not be seated and Minnesota law be followed. This is in response to Harry Reid's outrageous comments. http://www.rnla.org/ReidLetter.pdf

47. Senate Republicans remain firm in opposition to efforts to Senator Reid’s efforts to select Al Franken as Senator before the Minnesota Senate process is complete and wrote a letter to Senate Reid to that effect that reads in part: “The historically close election between Senator Norm Coleman and Al Franken has produced a count and a recount. The initial tally was won by Senator Coleman and during the course of the recount, several legal questions were raised that the state canvassing board was unable to address. As the Minneapolis Star-Tribune noted, “courts alone have the legal standing” to provide answers the Canvassing Board “lacked the authority” to answer. Under Minnesota state law, the state cannot certify a winner until the contest is resolved in court. . . .
“It is with all this in mind that we urge you to reconsider recent statements indicating you would attempt to use the power of the Senate to seat Mr. Franken before Minnesotans are able to certify the election. . . .
“The entire Senate Republican Conference stands firmly behind Senator Coleman and all Minnesotans who are working to provide the trust and confidence in this election that all voters deserve.” For full letter click here.

48. There’s little question that some valid votes are still uncounted. Republican Norm Coleman's attorney, Joe Friedberg, asked Minnesota Deputy Secretary of State Jim Gelbmann this:

"Based on the order of the Supreme Court, based on the closeness of the race, based on the candidates' own wishes, desires and motives, people whose votes should be counted, in your expert opinion and in the opinion of the counties, have been disenfranchised, correct?"

"That is absolutely correct," Gelbmann replied.

For complete story click here.

49. Moreover, another Democrat Minnesota elections expert, and Ramsey County elections chief, Joe Mansky, admits that local elections officials mistakenly and “wrongly excluded” numerous absentee ballots “because of errors and varying standards at local levels. . . .” Mansky admits “I can’t tell you how many” according to the Star Tribune, but that “he believes 62 rejected absentee ballots that were not tallied by the Canvassing Board should have been counted” in Ramsey County alone. For complete story click here.

50. Meanwhile, Franken is showing he’s still talking out of both sides of his mouth (Part 1) arguing to count “even flawed” absentee voters when he was behind, yet now trying to narrow the number of absentee ballots being reviewed. While trying to portray Coleman as trying to have it both ways, Franken’s being caught doing it. During the recount Franken’s lawyers argued that “Even where a ballot does not meet all the statutory requirements, mere technicalities or irregularities can not be used to exclude absentee ballots.” Now Franken’s lawyers are strongly resisting Coleman’s efforts to review all rejected absentee ballots statewide. For complete story click here.

51. Meanwhile, Franken is showing he’s still talking out of both sides of his mouth (Part 2) on counting absentee voters. Two groups of voters are trying to intervene in the case to get their votes counted. The first group of 61 voters, Franken supports letting in and having them count, including several that were rejected by the Coleman side during the recount. The second group, however, Franken doesn’t think should be let in, claiming they are “too late” having asked to intervene during what was still the first week of the case. For complete story click here.

52. Coleman lawyer Ben Ginsberg said "We're thrilled" in response to the court's order that approximately 4800 wrongly rejected ballots will be reviewed.  These ballots were previously identified by the Coleman campaign as having complied with Minnesota law, or where errors had occurred through no fault of the voter, but been wrongly rejected. For complete story click here.

53. Franken's efforts, backed by Secretary of State Ritchie during the recount phase, to limit review of rejected to absentee ballots to just the locations that Franken wanted (which also happen to be the ones that favor him) are being rejected by the judicial panel revieiwng the case which seems to be adopting Coleman's position.  "'The panel is going to make sure that every legally cast and wrongfully rejected ballot is opened and counted,' [Judge] Reilly said in court today.  The judge's statement was the first time anyone in the panel confirmed that indeed the panel wants more ballots included."  For complete story click here.

54. Franken's frantic efforts to get election certification in advance of the decision of the Contest Court so he can get his friend Harry Reid to seat him in the US Senate have now officially become a three-ring circus – unsuccessful with his attempt to directly bully the Governor and his fellow DFLer Secretary of State into signing the election certification in violation of state law, Franken is in court 2/5/09 asking the Minnesota Supreme Court to force the Governor and Secretary of State to sign an election certification, the day after getting his allies in the legislature to introduce a bill to mandate provisional election certification, retroactively, for the winner of a recount in a contested election.  Clearly, Franken is worried that the Contest Court will correct the improper recount actions of the Canvassing Board and seat Senator Coleman, and so he is trying every angle he can dream up to get himself seated in advance of the Contest Court’s correction of the recount errors.  More here.

55. RNLA releases a White Paper on Franken’s latest efforts to be seated entitled: Al Franken’s Attempts to be Seated as U.S. Senator for Minnesota — No Laughing Matter.

56. On February 5, a hostile, Minnesota Supreme Court, sternly question Franken’s lawyer Mark Elias on Franken’s effort to be seated despite clear Minnesota law.

57. Franken has clearly been coached on how to act while waiting for results of a recount/contest when you’re ahead. Franken, who was out of Minnesota for a month, including a two week vacation in Florida, and reportedly intentionally kept out of the way of reporters until recently. Go here for more details.

58. Franken is also trying to fit in with the new Democrats. Like Obama nominees, Tom Daschle, Tim Geithner, Nancy Killefer and others, Franken also has a record of significant tax problems. Go here for more details.

59. Coleman, meanwhile, continues his quest to count every vote. Late last week Coleman’s attorney Joe Friedberg attempted to enter a single ballot, even though it was for Franken, where the voter had “submitted an affidavit saying the vote was indeed his.” Go here for the complete story.

60. Valid votes continue to surface. The Anoka county Elections Manager announced in court late last week that the county has found about a dozen ballots that should be included in the total, including three ballots for Coleman that had not been included in the count in error. As Senator Coleman notes, “there is no question that the 225 number is an artificial number.”

61. RNLA’s efforts meet success! In a victory of significant proportions for Senator Coleman and those who respect the rule of law, Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid bows to public pressure – agrees he “won’t seat Franken prematurely. . . .[but] would wait until a Minnesota court case is concluded before attempting to seat Al Franken provisionally” according to Politico.com’s Scorecard.

62. And in further stark contrast to his stance during the recount, the “Franken ‘disenfranchise machine’ wanted to turn down ballots similar to many other rejected ballots that were eventually tallied in the recount,” according to a press report that notes Franken does not think absentee ballots should “be counted in 17 of the 19 categories identified by the judges.” In briefs filed yesterday that will be argued today in the Contest Court, Al Franken makes clear that he thinks almost none of the wrongly rejected absentee ballots, even those similar to the ones just agreed to be added by the court for 23 of Franken’s voters in the court challenge Franken underwrote, should be counted. The story goes on to say “Franken didn't give an unqualified "yes" to any of the questions. . . . During the recount and even into the court case, Franken's team argued to have certain rejected absentee ballots opened and counted — including some that fell into the specific categories his team said Wednesday shouldn't be counted.” Whatever happened to the Democratic mantra of “count every vote?” The hypocrisy is deafening – what they really mean is “only count every vote we think will be ours.”

63. RNLA’s Second White Paper is released: Proposing a Meaningful Solution to Protect Minnesota’s Military and Overseas Voters”

64. Urgent Press Release on Court Decision to Disenfranchise selected military and overseas voters.

65. Coleman Lawyer Ben Ginsberg said that the rejected categories that will hurt Coleman the most are the "sticker obstruction" ballots, of which he said they had 175, and the late military ballots, which numbered 35. 
But there are big categories of rejected absentee ballots still in the picture, he said: those with apparently mismatched signatures, rejected ballots that are marked as accepted, registered witnesses thought to have been unregistered.
 In the end, he predicted, the court will count between 2,000 and 2,500 rejected absentee ballots. Full Story here.

66. The problem, as laid out by his lawyers: Great chunks of uncounted absentee ballots have been ruled illegal by the judges because they fall into specific "categories" that make the ballots illegal, such as ballots submitted with unsigned applications. But, Coleman's legal team argues, hundreds of already counted ballots also could fall into one of those illegal categories. . . . While the Coleman legal team is protesting the decision, they are also obeying it.

67. Coleman for Senate legal counsel Ben Ginsberg today made the following statement. . .“In denying the request to file a motion to reconsider, the court creates a real problem for itself and the reliability of these proceedings.  The court in its Friday the 13th order ruled illegal under Minnesota law categories of ballots which results in thousands of already counted ballots now being called “illegal” by the judges. The order means the judges have now found illegal ballots they themselves allowed in just three days earlier among the Nauen intervenors.   And under the court’s ruling, some 100 illegal ballots are included in the 933 ballots counted by the Canvassing Board and thousands more in the counties election night totals.  The net effect of this ruling is that the court has declared thousands of votes illegal – but by virtue of its unwillingness to reconsider its motion, intends to allow those illegal votes to be included in the count.

68. Meanwhile, in Thursday's proceedings, Coleman lawyer Joe Friedberg focused much of his attention on ballot witnesses who might not be registered voters and on missing registration cards. He elicited testimony from elections officials in Eden Prairie and Minnetonka who said they don't check to see if witnesses are registered. "We do not do that ... because we have never been instructed to do that by the state or the county," said Eden Prairie City Clerk Kathleen Porta. That contrasted with Carver County, which checks addresses and voter registration rolls to make sure witnesses are registered. In November, Carver accounted for about half of the absentee ballots rejected in the state for lack of a registered witness. County elections supervisor Kendra Olson testified earlier this week that she believed state law required county officials to check on whether witnesses were registered. Ginsberg said that if Carver's 36 percent rejection rate were applied to Minneapolis and Ramsey and St. Louis counties -- all DFL strongholds that went heavily for Franken -- it would amount to 1,941 illegal votes.

69. In a Sunday column, professor at St. Thomas, and former associate dean of the University of Minnesota Law School, Michael Stokes Paulsen, wrote that the recount and contest “isn’t just embarrassing, it is unconstitutional. . . .Minnesota is Bush v. Gore reloaded.” He adds “what if there is no reliable way to determine in a recount who won, consistent with Bush v. Gore’s requirements? The Constitution’s answer is a do-over.”

70. The Pioneer Press Sunday editorial is entitled “Accidental Senator.” In it, the editorial calls for a run-off to decide the Senate seat. The editorial notes at the “process has been ‘transparent.’ It also has become increasingly confusing. Clearly, all the votes have not been handled in a uniform matter. . . . Meanwhile, the operative fact is that it is a tie. Without a runoff we will have an accidental senator.”

71. "Their motto is simple: If it's a vote for Franken, count it. If it's a vote for somebody else, disenfranchise the voter," Coleman Spokesman Drake said. . . . The canvassing board adopted this approach, hopefully the court will recognize the Constitution and treat ALL voters equally. “The order said its ruling on the specific question of the 933 ballots shouldn't be taken as a ruling on the rest of Coleman's case or on his claim that all votes must be counted according to the same standard to comply with the Constitution's equal protection clause. In other words, said Ohio State University election law professor Edward Foley, ‘equal protection is still alive.’" Full story here.

72. Wednesday ended with a display of more than 300 counted absentee ballots “even though they appear to be invalid.”  These “ballots were ‘but the tip of an iceberg of what exists here in the state in terms of illegal votes in the current count,’" according to the Coleman lawyer, Ben Ginsberg.  

73. The absentee ballots displayed were marked as accepted but don't appear to meet the legal requirements . . . . [including] ballots without signatures, ballots without witnesses listed, and more. Curiously, some of the ballots appear to have been filled in by the same hand. One of those ballots is for a Duluth voter named Catherine Dahlberg. Dahlberg's husband, Christopher . . . when contacted, said he was surprised there was an absentee ballot with his wife's name and address on it. Why? . . . . [h]is wife has been in China since June 13, Dahlberg said . . .long before absentee voting began. Furthermore, Christopher Dahlberg . . . said his wife should know how to fill out an absentee ballot. Before leaving to attend school in China, she worked in the St. Louis County elections office, he said.  "She's very meticulous," Dahlberg said. "She also worked in the elections office. If anybody, she would know (how to fill out a ballot)."

  74. In a parallel development on illegal ballots being allowed this time by the contest court and specifically favoring Franken,  the lawyer representing several dozen Franken voters whose votes the contest court has indicated will be counted, admitted that “several of their stories are more complicated and different from what they first told the judges.”  That’s a lawyer’s way of admitting that perhaps they didn’t tell the whole truth.  “One signed an affidavit saying she personally signed her ballot and ballot application. She now says her mother signed her application for her and when she signed her affidavit she mistakenly thought she was affirming that she signed her ballot and her voter registration card — not her ballot application. Two Dakota county voters previously said they accurately completed their ballots — they now say they didn't properly sign their ballots. The judges this month said such signatures are absolutely necessary.  Another said he had filled out a voter registration application and handed it to an Olmsted County clerk. But he now said he believes his registration card is inside his ballot's secrecy envelope. The shifting stories exemplify how, even with a lot of time, legal help and sworn statements, it is hard to tell which of the 11,000 rejected absentee ballots are valid and which are not.”

  75. Thursday the headline in the Star Tribune is spot on: Ballot ruling buoys Coleman. Two rulings were handed down.  In the first, the “Judges ordered inspection of 1,500 envelopes for rejected absentee ballots, which. . . . could lead to counting more votes, something Coleman needs, if local officials discover voter registration cards in the ballot secrecy envelopes of voters whose ballots were rejected for lack of registration.”

The second ruling reversed an earlier court decision and will allow testimony from a Coleman witness.  “Howell, a Republican table judge on Election Day, told . . . in court Wednesday that she heard another judge say that duplicate ballots had been fed into the vote tabulator without being labeled. By the time the mistake was discovered, the ballots were already lost among the other votes, she said.  The Coleman campaign has contended that such mistakes resulted in both originals and unlabeled duplicates being tallied during the recount.”

  76. The “Franken legal team has some problem getting absentee ballots straight. . . . [Coleman’s lawyers] posted three ballot envelopes Franken included on his list of votes that should be counted. Each of the envelopes came from voters who the Coleman campaign says were, in fact, dead on Election Day. Minnesota law requires all voters to be alive on the day of the election to have their votes counted.”

77.  Norm Coleman rested his case “sort of” late Monday.  Coleman attorney Jim Langdon ended with “‘Contestants rest provisionally.’ The Coleman camp wants to give the court more information before resting completely.”
Coleman's team has made two separate arguments:
       

In assessing Coleman's case, liberal election law professor Guy-Uriel Charles said that Coleman “has raised doubt about whether ‘the margin of error is greater than the margin of victory.’”

78.  Also Monday, the judges reversed themselves on “three absentee ballots . . . counted a couple of weeks ago [saying these votes] should be rejected because the voters failed to sign documents or didn't update registration after moving. They were among 24 voters believed to be Franken supporters whose absentee ballots the court had approved.

79.  State election director “Poser conceded that there were mistakes in a statewide database that local officials use to track voter registrations. Such a problem could have caused some absentee voters to have ballots rejected because it appeared they had registered and voted in person on Election Day. . . . Outside court, Ginsberg characterized Poser's testimony as a "blockbuster" admission that calls into question the entire database and the Senate tally itself.”

80.  In separate action on Monday, “Coleman lawyer Jim Langdon wrote the three-judge panel to suggest the problems are so serious they may not be able to declare a winner.  ‘Some courts have held that when the number of illegal votes exceeds the margin between the candidates -- and it cannot be determined for which candidate those illegal votes were cast -- the most appropriate remedy is to set aside the election,’ Langdon wrote in a letter to the court.”

81.  And columnist Michael Barrone writes that “My understanding is that the legal case currently before a three-judge panel is hopelessly compromised. . . . This would seem to me to raise equal-treatment problems as described in Bush v. Gore , even if the Supreme Court tries to say that Bush v. Gore was a one-of-a-kind case and not really precedent.

82. Al Franken’s side continues Coleman’s theme that voters’ absentee ballots were wrongly rejected. Al Franken's legal team brought forward a parade of people who say their votes may have been wrongly rejected in the U.S. Senate race. And, MN state election director, Gary Poser, admits the state database has both outdated and inaccurate voter information. Poser also admits there can be error by election officials, and that different counties have different registration requirements. “Asked why two registered voters received materials for nonregistered voters, Poser said it could have been because the wrong name was looked up or a name was mistyped. ‘Or it could be the data was wrong?’ Friedberg said. ‘It's certainly possible,’ Poser said. . . . Poser also said that some counties require voters who move from one apartment to another in the same building to re-register, while others do not. http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/40732432.html. Despite this, Franken’s lawyers move to dismiss Coleman’s case, following standard legal trial tactics after the moving side rests. http://www.twincities.com/ci_11848278
·

83.  Franken’s attempt to short-circuit the legal process to determine a winner has been stopped dead by a unanimous MN Supreme Court.  The Minnesota Supreme Court agreed with everyone, except Franken, that the law was crystal clear.  " ‘We conclude that neither state nor federal law requires issuance of a certificate of election before the election contest is completed,’ the Supreme Court wrote in a unanimous opinion . . . . Almost exactly a month ago, Elias argued before the justices that Franken should be given the certificate immediately. Langdon and the state's solicitor general argued he shouldn't. They said the law was crystal clear.”

  Coleman attorney Ben Ginsberg summed it up well:  “This wise ruling will ensure that Harry Reid, Al Franken and Chuck Schumer cannot short-circuit Minnesota Law in their partisan power play.” 

  84.  Meanwhile, election officials again concede that the election had a number of errors that can not be fixed.  “Joe Mansky, who oversees voting in Minnesota’s second-largest county, said elections just can’t be calibrated for a race this close.”

  85.  In a theft "obviously an attack on my campaign" according to Senator Coleman, and showing the desperation of opponents, Coleman’s campaign website was hacked and credit card information on donors and supporters was posted online, in an obvious effort to deter further donations to the campaign and make it harder to keep up his legal fight.  “The U.S. Secret Service is investigating how personal details on thousands of campaign contributors to Norm Coleman, enmeshed in a court battle to win back his Senate seat, were dug out of his database and posted on the Internet.”

86.  The court case is about to move into Coleman’s rebuttal phase.   It is reported that “barring unforeseen delays, the three judges could be deliberating by next week. . . . Once the judges determine which candidate got the most legal votes, the loser has the right to appeal to higher courts or the U.S. Senate.”

  87 In lighter news, the Los Angeles Times  notes that Franken is no longer funny, but is “just like a politician”, although apparently in exchange, the only currently serving Senator from Minnesota, “Amy Klobuchar, is rising to the task” of replacing Franken as a comedian.

88. Coleman’s closing argument highlights the legal strategy and the equal protection claims as pursued by the Coleman legal team. “Over the course of the trial, Coleman's legal team didn't offer proof that all the voters who cast those ballots were registered, had properly filled out and signed absentee ballot applications and had registered Minnesota voters witness their ballots. . . . Friedberg said, because it shouldn't be needed.” As an example, Friedberg noted that Carver County, which checked the witness registration on its ballots “found that about 4 percent of the 2008 absentee ballots it received were not witnessed by registered Minnesotans. Needing to confirm something that is true 96 percent of the time is too great of a burden. . . . It's more likely than not. It's more than probable cause. It's more than clear and convincing. And, based on experience, it's also more than proof beyond a reasonable doubt. It's proof beyond a moral certainty." Friedberg went on to say that “most local elections officials didn't require such extreme measures of proof when they were counting absentee ballots last year, and the judges' more rigid requirements violate due process and equal protection.” Click here for more details.

89. For more detail on what problems the Coleman attorneys feel is relevant, a memo lays out the various Bush v. Gore problems with the counting of votes from the fall elections in a concise document.

90. Though the presentation of the case is over, don’t expect a decision this week – speculation is early April before a decision is handed down. In addition to both sides’ final filings next week, the three contest judges still have several preliminary decisions to make to determine who received the highest number of legally cast votes, and once they decide they have to write their opinion, which because they expect it will be appealed they will want to write carefully. And then, the loser has ten days to appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court. No election certificate can be issued before either the deadline passes for the appeal, or the Supreme Court rules. For more see stories here and here .

91. In related news, last fall, Bernard Madoff, the investor who defrauded people out of billions of dollars in a ponzi scheme, donated $100,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. Even after Bernard Madoff, pled guilty, when asked by Weekly Standard reporter John McCormack “if the DSCC would return the Madoff money, spokesman Eric Schultz told me: ‘We haven't returned the money, and there are no immediate plans to do so.’ Schultz declined further comment when asked if the DSCC, whose chairman is New Jersey senator Robert Menendez, is concerned that the group had accepted $100,000 in what is essentially stolen cash.” As the website Minnesota Democrats Exposed asks “Did Madoff’s millions fund anti-Coleman attack ads?”

92. And will we hear a similar story in 45 years about the Coleman-Franken recount and contest? A story has just come out about stolen votes from the 1962 Minnesota recount that was just revealed because the perpetrators are no longer around to be able to prosecute.

93.  On St. Patrick’s Day the Coleman and Franken teams filed their closing filings with the court, and both teams upped the number of ballots they are asking the courts to consider in the final vote count.  TwinCities.com writes as follows: “In his filing Tuesday, Coleman said that 1,984 absentee ballots should be opened and counted. His list includes not only the 1,359 absentee ballots his lawyers ended their case last week saying were valid, but also the 413 that the campaigns blocked from counting during the recount and the 15 that local governments verified were valid or found — two in a storage bin — well after the state's two-month recount. . . . The Franken team also hedged its bets. Its new list of ballots that should be considered includes 430 absentee votes. In his closing argument, Franken attorney Kevin Hamilton said the team had provided evidence that 252 ballots should be counted.” Click here for more details here for more. 

  94.  Top Republicans encouraging Coleman to press the fight. “As they look ahead at the stakes -- one more Senate seat for the Democrats vs. one more for the GOP -- Republican senators are also looking back at a piece of court history -- Bush vs. Gore and equal protection arguments.”

95. Coleman's lawyer thinks victory will come on appeal. Joe Friedberg, Norm Coleman's lead attorney in his Senate recount trial against Al Franken, said the Coleman case was built on a constitutional argument that's better-suited for the likes of the Minnesota Supreme Court.

96. No court decision yet, but expectations are building and speculation on the rest of the process are filling the void. Read here to see one reporter’s educated guess of what happens next and how long until a decision. And for more on the mood on Minnesotans about further appeals, the likelihood of Governor Pawlenty signing the election certificate, and other speculation, click here.

97. Meanwhile, Senate Republicans are making clear they are in for the fight if Harry Reid and the Democrats attempt to seat Franken before the process is complete and due process is ensured. Texas Sen. John Cornyn is quoted as “threatening ‘World War III’ if Democrats try to seat Al Franken in the Senate before Norm Coleman can pursue his case through the federal courts.” As Politico reports “Both sides are girding for a long battle.” Click here for more.

98. Former MN elections officials are also weighing in. Partisan former MN Secretary of State Joan Growe opines that the process was good and Coleman was afforded due process. But Kent Kaiser, who worked in the MN elections office under both Democrats and Republicans, responds as follows “Growe writes that the Minnesota system is ‘fair, transparent and meticulous.’ While the jury (or, more accurately, panel of judges) is still out about whether it is fair, the system is indeed transparent, which is why we know with absolute certainty after seven weeks of trial that it is not as meticulous as we'd like…” Click here for more of Kaiser’s comments.

99. And Obama supporter and Yale Law School Professor Heather Gerkin, weighs in here with the view that the elections in Minnesota were not problem free in an opinion written to encourage support for her idea of a Democracy Index in an opinion entitled “Our elections run well. (Don't they?): Actually, no. Problems abound, and partisanship is not the culprit.”

100. Meanwhile, Al Franken continues to embarrass , like a parody of his earlier comedy acts, when he actually is captured live in Minnesota. See here for his latest verbal missteps, when, among other things he states “We will be seated, and by ‘we,’ I mean me.”

101. Finally, the Minnesota Independent reports that while the FEC “didn’t tell Al Franken what he wanted to hear” about fundraising for the recount, there is a little further insight into the recent FEC decision on fundraising for recounts and contests. Click here to read Commissioner Cynthia Bauerly’s response to a question about how Franken’s lawyer’s comment that there was “no end in sight” for the recount hurt less than originally speculated.

102. Rejected absentee ballots are finally opened, setting "the stage for Coleman to appeal, as he's said he will, to the state Supreme Court in his bid to overturn Franken's lead, which appeared to increase to 312 this morning. Franken received 198 votes, Coleman 111, and 42 ballots were placed in the "other" category, " according to the Pioneer Press . The Star Tribune reports that "The three-judge panel presiding over the case has not said when it will issue a final decision. . . .Coleman will appeal the case to the Minnesota Supreme Court, his lawyer Ben Ginsberg said after today's proceedings. One of the grounds for the appeal will be unequal treatment of the ballots, Ginsberg said. For more click Here and Here.

103. Whatever the results of the decision by the three judge panel deciding the contest, most all agree that appeal to the Minnesota Supreme Court is the next step. Democrat Secretary of State Mark Ritchie recently stated that “while he is eager for the contest to end, he actually hopes the judges' ruling is appealed. The court case . . . needs the kind of closure and sweep that only a state Supreme Court decision can provide, Ritchie said. . . .’It's been a long process and it's nearing an end, but we need a final summation of all this so we can put it behind us.’"

104. Coleman speaks confidently of an ultimate win, but is respectful of three judge panel’s attempt to decide in a non-partisan manner. Coleman’s recent quote: "I’m not saying, by the way, that this court was a partisan court. You had three trial court judges. They looked at the ballots in front of them. They made determinations about what they felt were legally cast ballots." Click here and here for more.

105. Experts see Coleman needing to stay in to the end. “ ‘It's probably more realistic to just see him completely entwined in this recount fight,’ said Joseph Kunkel, who teaches political science at Minnesota State University, Mankato. ‘He has to play it out to the bitter end.’ Kunkel sees little to gain from a graceful exit. ‘We're probably beyond the point where either one of these guys is going to generate any kind of goodwill,’ he said."

106. “To Republicans, the battle is about drawing a line in the sand . . . on voter-protection efforts — an argument typically associated with Democrats. ‘When people find out what happened, they’re outraged,’ said Michael Thielen, executive director of the Republican National Lawyers Association. Thielen said he was ‘shocked about the response and the interest” to the e-mails and the court fight.’” Click here for more.

107. Meanwhile, “Gov. Tim Pawlenty was quick to caution against jumping to any conclusions about the former senator's fate.” And elsewhere the Governor “said that the end of the Senate race, ‘looks like it's going to take a few more months. ’”Click Here and Here for more.

108. And US Senate colleagues are very supportive of Senator Coleman’s efforts and the time needed for appeals, “saying former Sen. Norm Coleman should push his election case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. . . . ‘this isn't just about Norm Coleman. . . . This is about protecting the rights of voters,’ said National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman John Cornyn (R-Texas). ‘It's to my mind a very noble endeavor and one in which, frankly, I admire his perseverence.’ Moderate GOP members also say they back a U.S. Supreme Court battle if Coleman chooses."

109. Join the petition to encourage Senator Coleman his quest to ensure that all legally cast votes are counted! As the petition states in part, “Thousands of Minnesota voters remain disenfranchised due to inconsistent standards of accepting ballots. I support Sen. Norm Coleman's efforts to ensure that every Minnesotan's vote is counted once with a uniform standard. . . . Sen. Coleman should keep fighting until it's achieved. Keep On Fighting, Norm!

110. On Monday, April 13th, a panel of three Minnesota state court judges declared Franken won the election (with a 312-vote lead) and should be certified as winner. Click Here for the RNLA's Statement on the decision.

111.Coleman has appealed the decision to the Minnesota Supreme Court.The Court has set June 1st, as the date for oral arguments.

For More Information Go To:

RNLA White Papers, Press Releases and Letters
ACORN

Help the RNLA fight for a fair election and against vote fraud! Send your dollars to the RNLA as we fight back against those who would tear down our democracy through voter fraud.

Or mail a check to:

RNLA
PO Box 18965
Washington, DC 20036

Contributions to the RNLA are not deductible as charitable contributions for federal income tax purposes.