(Norm) Coleman to judges: Reconsider your ruling

[sabra]

Source: CNN

MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota (CNN) — Republican Norm Coleman's attorneys Monday sent a letter to the three judges overseeing the election trial asking them to reconsider their game-changing ruling from Friday that put significant limits on the types of rejected absentee ballots they want examined.

The judges on Friday outlined about a dozen categories of ballots that should not be counted because they said those categories of ballots were not legally cast under Minnesota law. Those included ballots in which signatures didn't match, those submitted by non-registered voters or those inside a return envelope not signed by the voter.

But Coleman, who is seeking to add more rejected ballots to the recount of his November 4 race with Democrat Al Franken for a U.S. Senate seat, argued that not including all of about 4,800 ballots he wants re-examined was a matter of equal protection.

In their letter sent to the court Monday, Coleman's team is arguing that "likely thousands" of the ballots that had been sifted through during the recount process could have fallen under these now-taboo categories.

Read more: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/02/16/coleman-to-judges-reconsider-your-ruling/

[Uben]

1. Okay, ..........NO! nt

nt

[notadmblnd]

2. Why doesn't he just throw hiomself down on the courtroom floor

and cry... make me the winner .. make me the winner?

[w4rma]

3. It's over, Norm! You're back in the private sector! Quit trying to play these disingenuous games. nt

[damntexdem]

33. But as long as he does it, he keeps Franken from taking the seat.

That makes it a bit harder for the Dems to pass bills through the Senate -- so Norm will keep it up as long as he can.

My question: if the court rules for Franken, can he take his seat, or will he have to wait out any and all appeals?

[xxqqqzme]

41. yep. Time for normie

to accept a position on a board of directors or go to work for big pharma.

[underpants]

4. They are preparing to take this to the SC using Bush v. Gore as precedent

"Without a remedy, we will be faced with a widespread equal protection problem that would not only violate the law, but create Constitutional legal issues that would only delay this process further," Coleman attorney Ben Ginsberg said.

that is what Ginsberg is doing there. Bush v. Gore of course was said, in the opinions, to be the one and only case ever decided that could NOT be used as precedent which exhibits how clearly horrific of a maneuver that it was.

If Coleman doesn't win on the recount of these ballots he will take it to the Supreme Court. They just raised a ton of money to do just that.
At best they think they can pull this out at worst they will keep the Senate at 57 Dems for as long as possible

[truebrit71]

5. Too bad Bush v Gore related ONLY to that election theft.. and was NOT to be used as precedent...

...yet more proof that the SCROTUM knew they were fixing the 2000 S-Election...

Normy is SOL on this one...

[0xDEADBEEF]

24. "...the SCROTUM..."

LOLOLOLOL!

I'm stealing that line! ;)

[Spazito]

6. Yep, without question...

this has always been their fall-back plan. I hope the state Supreme Court rules quickly on their appeal which will be denied, I have no doubt, and then the USSC refuses to hear their appeal.

For the USSC to hear this would make Bush v Gore precedent-setting and I don't think even the worst of the scumbags (Scalia, Thomas, et al) want that to happen.

[Bake]

8. But didn't SCOTUS say that Bush v. Gore was not to be used as precedent?

Oh wait... what am I thinking? D'oh!

Bake

[Sal Minella]

13. Yes -- they were so ashamed of this decision that they pre-emptively erased it from history.

[damntexdem]

36. Yes, but then they're liars, so they MIGHT use it as a precedent.

But limited use only: to help GOPs, not Dems.

[liberal N proud]

21. Since when has that stopped lawyers from using precedents?

Once a decision has been made, it is open for use regardless of what the ruling body says about it.

It worked once for the GOP why wouldn't they think it would work again?

[apnu]

7. Norm, this is not how you win friends and influence people.

Telling the judges that they're wrong and should reverse their decisions is not a way to get judges to agree with your side of the argument.

[RC]

28. Let them go. Norm's attorneys don't need to know that.

[Tarc]

9. Judges to Coleman: GTFO

Hopefully.

[rollingrock]

10. He is delusional

Its scary to think that nearly half the voters of the state actually voted for this mad man.

[bdamomma]

11. doesn't work like that Norm, there are such things as laws.

what a sleaze, another whiny loser.

[scytherius]

12. Procedurally, he has to do this to preserve an appeal

Not saying he should, of course, but it's kind of a pro forma thing to do.

[babylonsister]

14. That should go over real well with the judges-Not! Keep up the

good fight, Normie. Everyone's watching.

[marshall]

15. Who are these morons who botched up their ballots?

If they can't fill out the ballot correctly who knows if they even know who's running? Or if they are really eligible to vote.

[onehandle]

16. Senator Al Franken.

Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken. Senator Al Franken...

[jhrobbins]

18. So, it's not really clear to me just who you are supporting here-I'm just sayin...

:rofl:

[onehandle]

25. Norm Coleman is my man. If he can't do it...

Wait... He can't do it.

[damntexdem]

37. Yeah, all this subtle, subliminal stuff gets to me, too.

;-)

[Wizard777]

17. The court MIGHT reach a decission before the next election.

[liberal N proud]

19. That may be Coleman and the GOP's plan

They don't have anything else.

[LiberalFighter]

20. Game-changing ruling? Wouldn't that require the rules to change after the election?

I don't see that to be the case. Rather, the judges are applying the law as it is currently on the books.

[gratuitous]

22. Foxy move, thanks to Minnesota's fucked-up election law

As long as Coleman can keep his legal maneuverings going, the election doesn't get certified under Minnesota law, and there's no provisional seating even of a clear winner. So, Coleman loses nothing by availing himself of every bullshit legal tactic his lawyers can think of. He’s already lost, but he can effectively deprive Minnesota of its full representation in Congress by stringing this out for as long as possible. It’s not like he has anything else to do, and keeping Franken from assuming the seat he won makes Coleman a hero in the eyes of some delusional fuckwads.

Minnesota has to change its election laws to allow for provisional seating of a declared election winner. I'm pretty sure that when the present law was enacted, the legislature had no idea that a Norm Coleman would come along to monkey wrench the process so effectively. But now that they have this sterling example of assholery, the legislature should change the law to prevent it from happening again.

[eilen]

26. Can't a citizen group sue Coleman & friends for depriving them of

representation?

[gratuitous]

27. Wouldn't that be nice?

But I don't think there's any provision in Minnesota law for penalizing Coleman's pettifoggery, which means that as long as he can keep a legal challenge going on life support, he can continue to shit the bed for all of Minnesota. Someone concerned about the public good would, of course, have been done with this charade weeks ago. But Norm Coleman is clearly not that person.

[eilen]

49. Couldn't grounds be found on a similar

"malicious prosecution" or something like that? Maybe the justice system needs to slam the door on his fingers.

[dflprincess]

30. Unfortunately, Norman is not doing anything illegal

However, rumor has it that, if Timmy Pawlenty doesn't run for governor again, Norm would be considered the front runner among Republicans "if" he doesn't go back to the Senate. I can't believe he's doing himself any favors with the general public dragging this out. I've begun to believe that he's not really interested in any kind of political future and is just dragging this out in anticipation of the reward he will get for being a good obstructionist.

Besides, if we were going to go after him for depriving Minnesotans of representation we'd have to go back to 2002 when he was elected to represent Bushco. At least now he can't cast any votes, so we're still better off than we were.

[DebbieCDC]

32. My thought exactly

Can't a Minnesota resident sue Coleman for depriving him/her of their constitutional right to 2 U.S. Senators?

[Sal Minella]

29. The old "Dog in the Manger" fable comes to mind -- the foul-tempered dog lying in the

manger full of hay put there for the donkey to eat -- the dog can make no use of the hay, but chooses to keep barking and growling, keeping the donkey away from food that is of no use to himself...... same thing, eh.

Except all Minnesotans (actually all U.S citizens) are paying a terrible price for Coleman's monumental assholery.

[Thor_MN]

43. Wrong. And I'd like to see how other states deal with a thousandths percent difference

election.

Once this election challenge is over, meaning this current trial, Minnesota will issue an election certificate. Norm is rapidly running out of options to extend this. It's gone on far too long, but there are no further appeals that are going to continue this.

It doesn't matter if Norm decides to appeal to the Supremes or the Galactic Overlord. As soon as Al gets his certificate, he gets seated. If the minority Republics try to fuss about appeals or other nonsense, they need to be stepped on. Minnesota's law provides for not granting a certificate until an Election Challenge is complete, but there's Jack about allowing a cry baby to get anything beyond the State's borders.

Key point before one goes about disparaging other State's laws, find out what your own state would do with an election this close. How many states could even do a meaningful recount? All votes cast were on paper ballots. All were manually examined excepting a couple hundred that went missing from one precinct. The repeatedly examined error rate for the scanners for a couple hundred votes allows the state to say that the potential errors there would be one vote or less. The original machine count was used for that one batch of ballots, otherwise multiple sets of eyes looked at every ballot.

[DrDeke]

23. (Norm) Coleman to judges: Reconsider your ruling

It's just like that Republican carpetbagger to try and rewrite
the election.

[dflprincess]

31. I hate to defend Normie in any way

but he moved to Minnesota in 1976 (Wellstone moved here in 1969). We can call him a lot of names ("Weasel" is my personal favorite), but carpetbagger isn't really accurate.

[fascisthunter]

34. time for a nap and a pill and a ...

straight jacket.

[Best_man23]

35. Coleman wants a ruling from Fat Tony Scalia

[wordpix]

44. Fat Tony is salivating over that - just like he salivated over Bush v. Gore

I despise that asshat

[spanone]

38. me to norm.....C O N C E D E

[Zorra]

39. It's time for Minnesota to tell Normie that he's a sniveling, childish sore loser

that is wasting everyone's time and money, and to just go away.

[KamaAina]

40. KamaAina to SoreLoserColeman: Reconsider your douchebaggery

:eyes:

[Thickasabrick]

42. If another election was held - who would win? Is there a poll like that?

[wordpix]

45. Normie's fighting for the right of non-registered voters' votes to count

Fighter for the people, lol

[No Elephants]

46. How much is the RNC giving Coleman to keep fighting this? Should we start a pool?

[Joe Bacon]

47. Wait! Norm is going to call on help from...

[davepc]

48. Coleman Lawyer: I *strenuously * object!

"I strenuously object?" Is that how it works? Hm? "Objection." "Overruled." "Oh, no, no, no. No, I STRENUOUSLY object." "Oh. Well, if you strenuously object then I should take some time to reconsider."