Tuesday wore away in Room 300 of the Minnesota Judicial Building. Norm Coleman sat in on his trial. Both sides and the 3 judge panel put in a hard 8 hours but the public only saw the half of it. We heard from witnesses but no life-changing rulings on motions, no smoking guns/ballots, but maybe the faint beginnings of a routine.
Who knows? Maybe TODAY the 9:00am CT Trial will actually have some LIVE BLOG action starting at 9:00am. Drop a recommend and find out!
Franken leads in the certified count: +225.
Live stream links: (Find another? Put it up in comments.)
The Uptake: http://www.theuptake.com/
Mogulus: http://www.mogulus.com/
WCCO: http://wcco.com/...
Its still January--- from the Roman 2 faced god Janus who looked backwards & forwards. C'mon forward past the fold for a look backward at yesterday's trial......
Personal PS: As noted in the Sunday diary I will be visiting my mom (Mama WineRev) in Florida (5 miles from the beach; +80 degrees from here) starting tomorrow. I'll get a diary posted in the morning but I'd like to invite volunteers to carry on the MN-Sen Events v. 1,345.7(!) series. More details in Sunday's entry. Drop a comment or sent me an e-mail and I'll set up a schedule.
Election Contest Court-- Episode XIII: The Morning Wait
Court started at 9:00am CT and almost immediately disappeared from public view. Cameras panned uselessly, microphones warmed and cooled, bloggers blagged and lagged.
Monday's stumbling beginning by Coleman's team was a pathetic study in how to NOT win cases and influence courts. I don't think anyone wanted to go through that again so the judges and lawyers from both sides went into a no-kidding huddle for nearly 4 hours. There was no word what finally moved things forward but a court bailiff was seen bringing a 2 foot sealed case into the conference room.
(The audio in the Minnesota Judicial Building is still poor so this report MAY be a bit garbled.) As the bailiff came out from the room a female voice (possibly Presiding Judge Hayden's?) was faintly heard to echo down the polished stone corridor: "Agreement or else." (Sonorous male voice--- Coleman atty. Friedberg?) "Or what, your honor?" "I'll open this case of lutefisk, and..." and the door closed. Court resumed almost immediately.
And what a resumption! Judge Denise Reilly in the center chair Tuesday after Judge Marben Monday, so they look like they ARE going to rotate the presiding task ("We'll take that under advisement"..."This Court does not believe...."). (So likely Judge Hayden today.) The afternoon session started with the ECC NOT saying what they had worked out with the 2 sides to re-start things.
Instead we moved straight to SHOWING what they'd worked out with "Motion to Strike!". The excited-lawyer-jumping-to-feet kind of "Motion to Strike" (NOT Session 3 of the DVD "Learning to Bowl." NOT the AFL-CIO battle plan to pass EFCA. NOT Robert E. Lee's final words to break camp): The Coleman Team moved to strike their OWN witness testimony from Monday. Huh?
Apparently this maneuver cleared the decks courtroom-wise, fulfilling all righteousness of court rules and procedures and got things restarted. Usually "move to strike" is an objection from the opposing side against a witness statement ("Mr. Smith is a scumbag!" "Move to strike the last sentence.") or an affidavit, or I suppose, even an exhibit ("We offer these graphic audio tapes of former congressman Foley as exhibits 4 through 137." "Move to strike # 63 through 66 as NOT graphic...")
So as far as I know a sort of unusual move. Any Kossack lawyer types ever done this? Seen this? I mean "move to strike" a whole day of your own case? Man that WAS a bad day! (Hope Norm got a refund on billable hours; really thats just awful and Coleman should NOT have to pay for it. I want Franken to win but that was pathetic, and if they actually charge Norm for "services rendered" for THAT day in court..... well I will hold Norm Coleman's coat and find him a horse denture mouthpiece and tie on his gloves myself as cutman in the corner as he goes a few rounds with Knaak, Trimble & Co. "Da Noive" indeed!) The restart DID let us get on to........
Witnesses: Coleman Case
The Coleman side called as witnesses 6 voters who had voted absentee whose ballots had been denied/rejected/refused. Much of the testimony circled around the "matching signature" criteria of MN law (this is #2 or "pile 2" of the 4 reasons.) For an absentee ballot to pass muster (pass all 4 mandated tests to be accepted) there has to be a match of signatures between application and ballot, subject to some narrow exceptions.
They all told their stories and, as FORMER Senator Norm put it at the presser afterwards, "put a human face on the absentee ballots." It did, but it remains to be seen if it helps the Norm case or becomes just a human interest interlude.
Eugene Markman of Waite Park, Minn., said he voted by absentee ballot so that he could spend 16 hours as chief election judge at a precinct in his former home town of St. Cloud. Coleman attorney Jim Langdon asked Markman to read aloud the reason (signature mismatch) another local official noted for rejecting his ballot.
"Whoever wrote this don’t know how to write either," Markman said with disgust.
One election judge couldn't read the handwriting of another election judge --- ouch! And a well chosen witness for Team Norm.
The 6 had a diverse set of stories to tell (esp. about the signature requirement) and what the Coleman side was driving at was trying to show how loose this criteria is. They are smart to focus here since asking election officials become handwriting analysts opens a real pack of pre-cooked linguini. THEN (a reach) if they can show inconsistent standards inconsistently applied it MAY (stretch that reach like a warmed up Gumby doll) open the door to them saying all 12000 absentee ballots that were rejected for the 4 legal reasons ought to be examined (1 by 1) by the ECC. (They have to get some major fraction of these ballots or its all over.)
WineRev on a Soapbox; firm, soft tone of voice:
(They also used a hoary lawyer's play for the sympathy of the Court by leading off with Mr. Gerald Anderson, a 75 year old disabled voter. Nothing new about this shtick for the judges or lawyers; they've seen it/done it themselves before many times. (Some lawyer-rabbi in front of King Solomon trying the Case of the Mystery Mothers probably brought in the baby in question and secretly pinched his bottom so the crying might sway the room.) But the blogger-folk over at the UpTake live blog were harsh.... and in my book unfair. In their comments they were either mocking Anderson for his disabilities or furious at Friedberg & team for "exploiting those disabilities".
This is not worthy of good people. Mr. Anderson is part of WHY absentee ballots exist, just as they existed for the Franken voter in Bemidji we heard about back in the initial vote check before the Recount--- remember the 84 year old woman whose signatures didn't match because she had had a stroke between application and voting? Her vote was being disallowed for this criteria and Kos bloggers were ticked off for the apparent injustice and heartlessness of the Beltrami County election officials. Yet no one was down on her for her medical situation. The story turned out to be garbled and the Franken camp dropped the issue fairly quickly.... but the point is made.
Bad move, UpTakers, but kudos for moderators Jennifer and Jason for calling them to task for it. Disabled is disabled; allowances are made and the voter votes. Meet the criteria and your vote counts: Coleman, Barkley, Lizard, Niemackl or even Franken.....and that is how it ought to be. Make your choice for your favorite or against your UNfavorite but VOTE!
And if you've got a trembly hand like Sec. of State Ritchie's grandmother or a vision issue, lets invent a way of helping out these VOTERS that gets their vote and keeps it private. Anything else is cruel, anti-democratic and unworthy of a citizen who one day may themselves tremble or be blinded by age. Let us live up to the better angels of our nature folks.) (WineRev steps off "Democracy" soapbox, resumes diary.)
For their last witness of the day Team Coleman had asked for a representative from the Secretary of State's office. The SoS's office sent over Deputy Secretary of State Jim Gelbmann.
(Fans of this series will remember early in December the State Canvassing Board was getting started on their work. Gelbmann's boss Sec. of State Ritchie had talked with the Board about sending out a letter to the county election boards asking them to examine and sort their absentee ballots. There was a certain "that sounds like a good idea if its worded right" air from the Board. While the discussion was on Gelbmann and staff put a letter together that was so crisp Ritchie was able to sign and send it the next morning.
Gelbmann also led the staff when the Canvassing Board was ruling on challenged ballots and both sides wree UN-challenging ballots. Gelbmann's team had to keep pulling the Un-challenges out and getting them back in the right stacks, and also keeping the challenged ballots that were ruled upon to THEIR proper stacks. The numbers moved so little (Franken one day +6 and Coleman +2 for instance) out of 6600 endlessly shifting challenged ballots because of Gelbmann's work. Sharp, competent customer Mr. JG!)
A comment from the Star Trib blog put it well:
I thought the big story today was Gelbmann, from the Secy. of State's office - Friedberg's (Coleman's) last witness. Gelbmann was called ... read more to show that there was no consistent standard in the way the rejected absentee ballots were reviewed under the Minn. SC order. Rather than show inconsistency, Gelbmann described a process that was controlled and carefully monitored, with the ultimate decision about validity of each absentee ballot resting with either a county election supervisor or a county panel, based on criteria that only allowed discretion when it involved signature analysis. Gelbmann's testimony, that continues tomorrow at 9AM, demonstrated an election system made up of dedicated public servants working tirelessly to canvass with deference to the law and each individual's right to vote.
Coleman's side got a LOT less out of Gelbmann than I think they wanted. Also, if the commenter above is correct Gelbmann will open things today back on the stand at 9:00am defending his election officals across the state and the entire system. So more JIM POWER for fair, clean, transparent elections!
Cross-Exams & Objections: Franken case
Marc Elias handled a lot of the cross-examinations (a somewhat delicate task for these witnesses) and Kevin Hamilton did a good bit of the arguing over points of law. Together they raised the excellent point that these absentee ballots had been rejected by election officials under 1 of the 4 statutory reasons and that those folks ALSO had a story to tell. (Unclear if Coleman side plans to call such folks or Franken will for their own case.)
Franken lawyers also objected to four of the six people who testified Tuesday, saying that they were not among the 654 people whose rejected ballots Coleman had initially wanted to review and were instead part of the campaign's attempt to reconsider a much larger number of rejected ballots.--- Star Trib
They next invoked the idea that "equal protection" does NOT equal uniformity or perfection. Otherwise all 3 million votes would have to be cast in front of 1 election judge (and the Coleman team would probably argue that the 7:30am decisions were different than the 11:00PM decisions...sigh). It was a nice reductio ad absurdum (WineRev struts across diary, showing off at least 1 appropriate Latin phrase).
They further argued MN has a 40+ year history of addressing these issues in practical terms and in case law and that experience and precedent all matter too. (And you know how legal types LOVE terms like "practical" "precedent" and "case law", so I think they held their ground here, even maybe gained some.)
They called foul on the Coleman team for their "shuffling the deck" of how many absentee they want to have the ECC look at: 654 cherries? 4549 Trimble Taters? Or all 12000 shelled peas? They quoted the 204 page Coleman filing of the case (ooohhh, don't you HATE when someone reads your own stuff against you? Petard hoisting and all?) only called for the 654 and asked the court to hold Coleman to that (under advisement of course.) (There are also rumors/stories afoot if the ECC agrees to look at Norm's 654 cherry-picked beauties from piles 1-4, asking the ECC to ignore the law-- because the law was improperly applied--- that Team Franken has a list of 770 absentee ballots they have grape-picked and are ready to drop on the sorting table for cuvee and reserve wine making.)
Local Coverage:
Again the best write-up is at the MinnPost and Jay Weiner here (what good reporting looks like! Man he's good.):
http://www.minnpost.com/...
Of the Mpls Star Trib and the St. Paul Pioneer Press the Press' Rachel Stassen-Berger (is she related to the famous MN Harold Stassen? A daughter maybe, or even granddaughter?) seems more complete and the story has a nice short slide show of scenes from yesterday's courtroom:http://www.twincities.com/...
OK the Wednesday morning media stuff is incorporated above. I'll do some packing before heading out for the late shift at the wine shop. Hope this will hold you until 9:00am when the comments can really fly. Thats the latest from yust southeast of Lake Wobegon.
Shalom.
UPDATE: The Great Orange One with the really low User ID number has a nice take up on the state of the case on the Front Page here: http://www.dailykos.com/...