Posted on 03/04/2009 10:07:02 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Norm Coleman’s attorneys finished presenting their case to the election contest panel with a suggestion that Minnesota conduct a revote. The recount effectively tainted the process so badly, attorney Jim Langdon told the three-judge panel, that it could not be rescued. The Coleman campaign echoes what many have begun to consider, including the capital’s newspaper:
For more than a month, Norm Coleman stressed flaws in Minnesota’s election system.
And 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.
Franken’s team argued the opposite — that Minnesota did a good job in managing the election and that the results from the recount are reliable. However, as the Strib notes, that conflicts with the Franken position since Election Night:
But Franken lawyers will walk a tightrope with that strategy, because they also plan to call on voters to testify that their absentee ballots were wrongly rejected. While Coleman seeks to count 2,000 rejected ballots, the DFLer has a list of 804 rejected ballots he wants reconsidered. Elias said more than 100 voters could be called to testify, including more than a dozen today.
The decision by the contest panel to block ballots for having the same flaws as those accepted in the recount phase has essentially ruined the recount.
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
How about a revote for President?
Minnesota Recount exclusive: Not so fast on the do-over
***************************************************
posted at 7:42 pm on March 3, 2009 by Ed Morrissey
Earlier today, I posted about the Minneapolis Star-Tribune’s report that the Coleman campaign had requested the election contest panel to throw out the election results and order a new election. This seemed like such a remarkable position that I contacted the Coleman team to find out whether they had a legal basis to make such a request. I spoke with Ben Ginsberg, Coleman’s attorney and spokesman for the legal effort involved in the recount and contest — and he says that the Strib overreached in its reporting.
“I think that was really overstated,” Ginsberg told me, “and bad reporting by the Star Tribune.” The confusion comes from a motion argued on Friday that the contest panel should be accepting absentee ballots by consistent standards — consistent to what has already been accepted. When they argued the motion, one of the contest panel judges asked what the remedy would be if the panel decided that the inclusion of the illegal votes created too much of a mess. The Coleman attorney arguing the motion, Jim Langdon, then replied that other courts in other states have ordered new elections.
Ginsberg told me, “We’re not asking for a new election, or anything like that.” The Coleman campaign insists that they remain focused on getting all of the remaining absentee ballots counted in a consistent fashion as on Election Night and in the recount. Any other remedies would have to be considered only after a failure in that effort, and Ginsberg declined to comment on what other options the Coleman camp might pursue under those circumstance.
Bottom line: the Coleman campaign did not request a new election.
I for one would LOVE to see a revote..without “the one” on the ballot this time, dems wouldn’t be interested and would stay home..coleman wins by a 2-1 margin..THAT is why the frankenstein team will be against it..
LOL, that fits perfectly.
:)
It really should be no surprise that the Star and Sickle got it wrong.
Isn't that paper dying like the rest of the Democrat Pravda organs?
Revote would have been quicker and cheaper.
Who is going to go before the panel and admit that they are too dim to vote correctly?
FLASH! UPDATE, Oct. 31, 2011: The Court has finally decided that Al Franken is the winner! However, as Franken is in Federal Prison, having been found guilty of Tax Evasion, Coleman will temporarily fill the vacant seat.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.