« ON FRANKEN’S ARTIFICIAL RECOUNT “LEAD”… | Home | MUST READ FROM THE WSJ: “FUNNY BUSINESS IN MINNESOTA” »
FOR THE SAKE OF MINNESOTA, SENATOR COLEMAN SHOULD CHALLENGE THE RECOUNT IN COURT
By Michael B. Brodkorb | January 5, 2009
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. To this day, Ramsey County election officials have been unable to reconcile the number of votes cast with the number of voters who signed in to vote, yet the State Canvassing Board allowed the votes to be counted in the recount.
#2 “Missing ballots†supposedly tallied on election night that could not be found during the recount process. In Hennepin County Ward 3 Precinct 1, when officials came up 133 votes shy of their Election Night totals, the Canvassing Board decided to use election night totals instead of the recount totals, resulting in 133 votes from a precinct near the University of Minnesota Minneapolis’ campus never being counted, inspected or even there to be challenged,
#3 “Double counting†of original and duplicate ballots of the same voter. The double counting occurred because all unmatched originals ballots were also counted during the recount upon instruction of the Secretary of State Mark Ritchie’s office. That results in some voter’s vote being counted twice – an inaccurate and unacceptable result nonetheless currently included in the State Canvassing Board totals.
#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. A review of all absentee ballot envelopes in the Minnesota by the Coleman’s campaign yielded an additional 650 envelopes that election officials rejected in error. Yet Team Franken, with the assistance of the Secretary of State Mark Ritchie’s office, refused to review any of the ballots Coleman suggested. This is despite the fact that many of these ballots were precisely like ballot envelopes Team Franken wanted reconsidered with Secretary of State Mark Ritchie’s office’s concurrence.
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.
Minnesota deserves two U.S. Senators that can serve a full six-year term without a cloud hanging over their head. The recount process to date has produced too many clouds of suspicion, too many reasons for Minnesotans to question who was really elected. For the sake of Minnesota, Senator Coleman should challenge the recount in court.
Topics: Uncategorized | 35 Comments »
35 Responses to “FOR THE SAKE OF MINNESOTA, SENATOR COLEMAN SHOULD CHALLENGE THE RECOUNT IN COURT”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
January 5th, 2009 at 7:43 am
Desperation has now fully overcome Michael.
Coleman incidently has been strangely silent. Is a concession looming?
January 5th, 2009 at 7:56 am
Minnesota deserves two U.S. Senators that can serve a full six-year term without a cloud hanging over their head.
Well, that leaves ol’ Smokescreen out, Michael.
Or did you forget about the pending Ethics Investigation into Norm’s D.C. digs?
You know, the one that landed ol’ Smokescreen with the Court-certified label, “The Fourth Most Corrupt Senator.”
Have you forgotten about ol’ Smokescreen bein’ looked at by the FBI?
If wanting a Senator without a cloud is what you want, then you do NOT want ol’ Smokescreen goin’ back to D.C.
Because a betting man would bet Coleman has a better chance of goin’ to ClubFed than goin’ the whole six years.
January 5th, 2009 at 8:11 am
Tommy Johnson,
Wow. You have mastered the non sequitur:
“I think Senator A is corrupt for lame reasons 1 2 and 3, and this relates to the recount process in some magical way. And George Galloway is still my hero.” (paraphrased)
And I think you meant to write “Because a ‘handi-capable’ betting man …” at the beginning of your last sentence. No charge.
January 5th, 2009 at 8:16 am
I think Al Franken will be just as effective voting for Billions of dollars of wasteful spending as bailout Normy.
No matter who is declared the winner they will contribute to the death of this nation. You can’t take thousands of my dollars and give it to failures without consiquence.
January 5th, 2009 at 8:23 am
Troy, just admit you didn’t get the point.
Do you think Coleman would go to D.C. without a cloud over his head, given that he’s The Fourth Most Corrupt Senator – and has a pending Ethics Committee Complaint AND a FBI investigation looming?
And don’t forget that it’s been 154 days since Coleman spokesman Mark Drake promised to check about providing an actual utility bill for Norm’s DC digs.
Why hasn’t ol’ Smokescreen provided an actual utility bill? A good guess is because the utility bill is in a corporate name.
Michael says he wants a senator without a cloud; that can go six years.
That guy is NOT ol’ Smokescreen; the fourth most corrupt senator.
My prediction is Norm does a PerpWalk, demonstrating once again why GOP now stands for GreedOverPrinciples.
January 5th, 2009 at 8:23 am
Imagine the firestorm in the media and DFL if our SOS was Mary Kiffmeyer and the recount was favoring Norm Coleman. Fight with all you’ve got, Norm. Then Minnesotans must join and demand the removal of SOS Ritchie, who’s successfully ruined our state’s election reputation to elect an idiot.
January 5th, 2009 at 8:34 am
And Lassie weights in, to defend The Fourth Most Corrupt Senator.
Just think – Normie attained that Judge-Certified ranking, in just six years.
Imagine what crimes Norm Coleman could accomplish in 12!
January 5th, 2009 at 8:38 am
Hey Fatboy, Might as well give it up. You and your nazi pals screwing over all the democratically elected Ron Paul delegates at the state convention really paid off for you right?
Yeah you sure could use those RP votes that didnt vote for your pal Normy becuase of the way you treated them.
Had you played fair and tried to bring new people into your little nazi club you would not be facing this problem now.
What goes around comes around!!!
Ha ha ha I love it. SCREWED!!!
January 5th, 2009 at 8:53 am
“FOR THE SAKE OF MINNESOTA, SENATOR COLEMAN SHOULD CHALLENGE THE RECOUNT IN COURT”
Mike, I agree 100%, because it will mean political suicide for Senator Coleman, and we will be done with him once and for all.
BUT, I believe even he is an honorable man and will not drag this state through anymore than he has already. He also has options available to him right now, all of which will evaporate the longer he delays the innevitable.
So I hope he fights on as well, Mike. But believe he will see through his crystal ball he has absolutely nothing to gain and will acquiesce.
January 5th, 2009 at 8:57 am
Minnesotans were screwed. The Wall Street Journal knows something’s up. Franken may have “won” but Ritchie’s going down.
January 5th, 2009 at 9:12 am
Lassie, from your link:
“(Franken’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.
Yeah, “right.”
Ritchie got the other members of the canvassing board – 4 judges (none of whom were appointed by a Democrat) – to go along with funny business, and “deliver inconsistent rulings”??!?
Go for it.
Reasonable people will not.
January 5th, 2009 at 9:34 am
[...] post by WP-AutoBlog Import var AdBrite_Title_Color = ‘0000FF’; var AdBrite_Text_Color = ‘000000′; var [...]
January 5th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Michael,
You do not even try and disguise your lies.
“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 non-partisan election officials in the counties came up with the 1350. Coleman may disagree, but at lest be honest enough to say who selected those 1350. It was hard working, non-partisan volunteers in the counties. You besmirch the hard working election judges in each county by your blatant lies.
thanks,
Alec
January 5th, 2009 at 10:16 am
Let’s recap, shall we:
-Election canvassing board are highly esteemed judges appointed by conservatives or independents.
-The people who picked out the improperly rejected absentees were non-partisan county election officials not associated with any candidate or party.
-Every decision made was broadcast for the world to see with ultimate transparency
-Norm did not want the absentees counted in the first place until after the recount
-Vote swings in the 1-2 thousands are typical from election night, it just usually never matters
Minnesota did it and does it better than anyone, and the conservatives and liberals worked together.
Thanks,
Alec
January 5th, 2009 at 10:30 am
It was Franken and then Ritchie that came up with the”potentially wrongly rejected absentee ballots” scheme… and that’s where the election is being stolen…. by democrat leaning precincts “unrejecting” ballots that they themselves rejected.
Franken and Ritchie besmirched election officials by declaring that they screwed up in the first place. They told them to find ballots that they “improperly rejected”.
If election officials were doing such a great job there should not have been a single ballot in that made up “5th pile”.
Having they very same people who Franken and Ritchie claim screwed it up in the first place then try to “fix” it is just plain silly.
Why would anyone trust the folks who screwed it up to begin with?
January 5th, 2009 at 10:40 am
Say, Cheeto boy? Do you come up with all of this (snicker) insight *while* you’re plowing out a SuperAmerica parking lot, or afterwards, while wanking yourself to sleep in moms basement?
Pffft.
January 5th, 2009 at 10:43 am
Flush, you support a guy who steals from kids charities and publishes stories about his 12 year old son’s obsession with beastiality…and then presume to lecture us about “honor”….really?
BWwwwahahahahahaHAHaHAHAhaAhahAHaahaHahAhahAhaha!
January 5th, 2009 at 10:46 am
Tom, you keep making up stories about stealing and expect people to believe you. Money was borrowed, legally, and repaid, in full . . stolen, only in your fantasy world
Talk about funny business
BWwwwahahahahahaHAHaHAHAhaAhahAHaahaHahAhahAhaha!
Pfffffft!
January 5th, 2009 at 10:51 am
Norm Coleman’s hands are dirty and he does have clouds over his gead. The $75,000 that was sent to his campaing via his wife’s bank account at the Insurance Company where she worked part-time, smells rotten. Coleman’s personal and monetary ties to convicted felon, Sen. Ted Stevens, damages whatever integrity Coleman may have had. What about those expensive Nieman Marcus suits Coleman was given by the same guy who funneled the $75 K?? No clouds over his head!!! That dog don’t hunt!!
If I were counseling Norm Coleman, I would tell him that he should concede graciously when the Canvassing Board certifies Al Franken the winner this week. I think a concession would be in Norm Coleman’s best interest to preserve what Political integrity he has left at this juncture.
A prolonged lawsuit to retain the title of “Senator from Minnesota†would further tarnish any future political hopes Coleman might still have.
If Norm Coleman concedes this week, he’ll look gracious and avoid the “sore-loser†label that will plague him if he fights in court. Polls have shown that Minnesotans approve of the recount. Minnesotans think the election was fair. I don’t think the public will get behind a court challenge. Moreover, Norm’s own words are really going to haunt him. Remember, right after the election Norm called on Al Franken to concede. Coleman also stated that if the roles had been reversed, he would be the one to step aside and allow the election to be certified. Coleman also said it was time to heal. If Norm takes this to court, he’ll be labled a hypocrite.
On the flip side, a gracious concession from Norm Coleman would prove that he practices what he preaches. It would reinforce Norm’s self-styled image as a moderate and a uniter. I would assume that his favorability ratings would shoot up significantly.
But from what I have been reading, it does not appear that Norm Coleman will adhere to any suggestions or opinions like mine. Sad for Norm and his political future should he proceed with a drawn out lawsuit.
January 5th, 2009 at 10:55 am
Say, Kathy?
Do you come up with your insightful political opinions while driving a plow truck around parking lots with Cheeto boy?
January 5th, 2009 at 11:01 am
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.
Well, see, Mikey, there’s your problem — he wasn’t. Al Franken won. Norm lost. If Norm could put forward something other than “Hey, I found 650 ballots that county officials rejected, that just happen to come from Republican areas, and I’d like them counted,” then I’d be happy to say that we should count them too. But of course, Norm doesn’t have anything else but smears and innuendo.
Incidentally, remember the column you penned where you said Mark Ritchie was going to be a fall guy? Because, you know, I think you could change the name to Eric Magnuson and the party to Republican, and it would reflect reality.
January 5th, 2009 at 11:01 am
Swiftee!!
I still have thast image in my mind of you doing the single fingered salute plastered all over the Internet. Have you gotten your hair cut in the mantime??
Cheeto Boy and I are not acquainted or associated in any way.
January 5th, 2009 at 11:09 am
Kathy, ya gotta love a loser like Scrotee callin’ someone else, “Cheeto Boy.”
Hypocrisy, Thy Party Is GOP.
With Scrotee as a poster boy.
January 5th, 2009 at 11:15 am
I will just state the obvious, but I think the Coleman camp has to really consider the consequences of contesting this election (or to what extent to contest it). You see we have the Franken camp and the Coleman camp…and then we of the Ritchie Camp and the State board. The Secretary of State, frankly- no pun intended- (I’m serious!) Mark Ritchie fooled me; maybe he fooled himself as well. It appeared at first at least to me that he was determined to run this whole process fairly, but when the canvassing board got together I saw a different person that seemed to be more interested in finishing this count as if it were a college project due or something.
Well, it’s not…The MN Supreme court shares a big part of this problem. This may be rude but for a Supreme Court not to be able to decide whether an additional charge on a product is a tax or fee is a red flag.
Now with this puny decision about the acceptance of absentee ballots considered wrongly rejected by county officials to be decided on by the two camps each with veto power is naive.
The threat of sanctions you say?
Well what the hell are they going to do? Overturn the election?
Like I said naive.
Obviously whoever is leading in that situation will want the most ballots rejected as possible. All these people on the board and Supreme Court are obviously very intelligent, but I think most have lost touch with the average human animal brain: the drive to win especially when employed to do just that is VERY High!
I’m disappointed because I would have shredded or made paper-airplanes of all ballots that had intentional identifying marks bearing any letters and names or funny signs.
To me these are identifying marks that duh, could be used to like identify a certain voter. It is amazing that they (canvassing board) would consider a thumb print as an identifying mark but not a set of letters marked over and over again beside each selection on the ballot. Maybe these people are too smart for this type of work or I’m just a moron.
To me any purposeful distinguished marking representing anything you could find in your alphabet soup bowel should have been destroyed.
That would in my view have been very consistent.
Now I’m not a lawyer and I am pretty sure I could never make it through (maybe even ever enter) law school but aren’t laws supposed to be interpreted by the spirit or logic behind the law?
The judges focused too much on the tractability of the stray mark to the voter. This obviously is important but so is the Intent. And printing sets of letters IS identifying the ballot! The intent part was much overlooked and the spirit of the law much deflated.
It is disturbing at least in my view that practical abstract thinking was overcome with the pressure to be consistent and as it seemed to me to count as many intentional marked ballots as possible.
Stress can impair judgment just as the boy after his first date will tell you…(also the mature man after an important date) I understand and I am being perhaps unfair. Perhaps the board was so afraid of being seen as disenfranchising voters they ignored part of the law.
If someone writes “Porky Pig” and it’s an over-vote most little kids after having explained to them the seriousness of the vote would shake there heads (I hope at least) and so no…Get rid of the porkster. You see “Porky Pig” is not running for office (…Oh I know there is always a possibility that it could be a real person!…but be bold and just make an assumption, it’s done all the time! We can’t be one hundred percent sure of most everything in life!). Now this was just an example, “Porky Pig” as to my knowledge was not a write in that the board accepted, but there are similar situations which they did.
Also “Porky Pig” could very possibly match a voter or a small pool of Porky Fans thus identifying the voters who may have a loosy goosey mouth and tell people what they did since it’s probably no fun to do stuff like this in complete secret.
The ballots with the voters’ passport numbers written on the overseas ballots were rejected and that makes since even if it was unintentional but so should have all those purposefully marked ballots distinguished by what you may see in your alphabet soup or any special symbols.
I’m going to say something gross now.
What if someone poured urine on the ballot and somehow got away with it? Would that be an identifying mark? Not many ballots have urine on them and that person may be prone to talk about what he did as he has a beer with Mr. or even Mrs. “Lizard People.” in secret…scandalous.
Have we all turned into computers able to recognize patterns but unable to reason?
If anyone happens to read this venting of mine and happens to employ there creative work while they vote then I have a suggestion for them. Please grow up…you will actually be happier not sadder. This may be counter intuitive, but it’s true for most people anyways.
January 5th, 2009 at 11:19 am
Proud Republican, I think I can say with 100 percent certainty that you are the base of that party.
May God have mercy on the Minnesota Republican Party.
January 5th, 2009 at 11:24 am
Say, Flush?
You say the paychecks Porn-O-Rama cashed with money filched from a kids charity was legal; Rod Blagojevich says everything he does is legal, and in the best interests of the state of Ill.; Jesse Jackson Jr. says he’s a pillar of the community and would never do anything illegal and Rahm Emanuel isn’t saying much at all.
Does the party of Scrubs maintain a facility to pump this kind of embaressing mendacity into your empty skulls, or is it taught from generation to generation in a family type business?
January 5th, 2009 at 11:30 am
Kathy…keep that image at the ready at all times; when it comes to a member of the party of Scrubs in good standing, it’s *always* appropriate.
Would you like an autographed print?
And no, my hair is actually quite a bit longer now…thanks for asking. Maybe it’s time I get an updated Scrub salute protrait out there to my fans.
Say Cheeto boy?
The snow forcast for the next few weeks looks pretty bleak. If you run low on Cheeto’s, and find yourself strapped for cash, give me a call…I’ve got several pairs of very expensive boots that need the attention of an expert such as yourself.
HAHAHAHAhahaha!
January 5th, 2009 at 11:35 am
Say, Scrotee? The forcast for the republiCon party looks pretty bleak for the next few years; but that’s only because asshats such as yourself are the base.
And base you are!
Especially for republiCons like Larry Craig, boy.
January 5th, 2009 at 11:46 am
Still got ol’ Larry floating around in your empty little brainpan, do you Cheeto boy?
No wonder you can’t stop thinking about male genitalia.
SAY!
You should get together with Feckless Jeffy….he was confused too, but now he’s sportin’ an honorary uterus and loves to get all feminine. He could probably help you through your “issues” over a nice heaping bowl of Cheeto’s down in moms basement.
Hell, you’re already sharing buzz words…I’m guessing that after a couple of weeks you’ll have sync’d your “cycles”, too!
HAHahahAHAHHAAHAH!
January 5th, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Hey, Proud Republican you just wrote that if someone wrote me in (I am running for office…all of them!)as a candidate and it was an overvote that most little kids would throw it out.
Well dummy! if it’s an overvote the ballot would be thrown out anyway!
January 5th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
“Well dummy! if it’s an overvote the ballot would be thrown out anyway!”
You haven’t received the updated rules from Mark Ritchie, have you Porkey.
See, if it’s a Porky\Coleman overvote..out it goes.
But Porn-O-Rama\Porky votes are Golden!
Try to keep up, won’t you?
January 5th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
Porky…I don’t believe you exist. I think this a person and not a cartoon pig reacting to my posted message. But, I will explain and ward off your weak attack. “Get rid of the porkster” means to not count the ballot as an overvote but instead a rejected ballot due to the voter’s intentional identifying marks. I see the distinction as a very important one.
How many ballot’s were you a write in candidate Porky?…not many I assume. You phony.
January 5th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
It’s unfortunate that more republicans didn’t vote for Norm. Disaffected conservatives could have carried Norm’s vote total significantly higher, avoiding this ridiculous and corrupt recount. But they didn’t. And here we are.
Considering Mark Ritchie was elected as a darling of Soros’ SOS project, a project designed to win elections for democrats, and the inherently corrupt ACORN connection, Ritchie should have recused himself from the recount process. But then he would have missed out on a lot of photo-ops needed for the forthcoming Mark Ritchie For Governor campaign. Big picture Ritchie isn’t the problem with our election system. The laws we have in place leave way too much room for nonsense. Hence, a motherlode of nonsense.
Everyone is focused on the shiny object, the blooming recount, when the real cheating took place before the votes even reached the machine counters. Our voting system is clearly open to cheating. Whether absentee voting, early voting or same day registration without photo ID, our system invites corruption. To be fair, both sides could have cheated. If they did, they cheated simply because it was possible. Humans do that. Why we are so blind to that reality astounds me.
Cheating or not, I’m surprised that Franken did as well as he did. The fact that Franken even has a chance at this late date, not to mention a clear numerical advantage, is simply astounding.
Court challenge or not, republicans will further alienate themselves from mainstream Minnesota by prolonging this media driven express lane to numbsville. The public has been turned off by this recount process. The more outrageous the situation has become, the less interested the public is in putting forth any resistance. Pretty depressing how that works. Our representative process is in shambles and burning to the ground. The higher the flames go the less interested the public seems in putting out the fire. And government goes on growing day after day after day with no limitation in sight.
Court challenge or not, for a clown like Al Franken to be certified today as our next Senator is yet another indication that it’s time to move to South Dakota.
January 5th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
FREE Online Movies, TV, Music, Good Games, Virtual Worlds, and FREE College Educations @ InternetSurfShack.com
January 7th, 2009 at 4:02 am
[...] So then there was the election, and that (bleep) jerk Coleman beat me out by a lousy 726 votes. 726? I thought for sure I would win with a crushing majority, what with riding on the coattails of Obama and my D-list Hollywood fame and all. Fortunately for me, Minnesota has this great deal where recounts are automatic if the winner wins by a margin of less than one half of one percent. So it now turns out that instead of losing to Coleman by less than a thousand votes, I’m about to be named “the winnah” by 225 votes. Hey, is it my fault that election officials might be double-counting ballots? I’m in it to win – I mean, I’m in it to serve the people of Minnesota, bless their hearts. But only those Minnesotans who voted for me, the number of which seems to be growing by the day. [...]