I hate to be a stickler, but…..Who’s Suing Whom? (LOL)

I don’t know the makeup of the Minnesota Supreme Court, but the chief justice and an associate justice were both part of the panel that voted 5 – 0 on the ruling that coleman is challenging

anybody ever heard of a Judge reversing himself in a situation like this ???

both of the SJCs on the panel are republicans too

so long norm, hope everything works out good between you an the FBI (well, good for the FBI anyway …)

Unanimous yes, but there was Judge Cleary’s comment that Pile #5 ballots might be 5-a, 5-b, etc., in otherwords there might be differences among the decision errors from the existing excludability standards. It is a very weak reed on which to hang an appeal to the Minnesota Supreme’s, but there it is.

What Minnesota has is a four part standard for excluding absentee ballots — and then we have a fifth pile that don’t fall within any of these standards, but were excluded nonetheless. For instance, we have the example that was furnished by the Assistant Secretary of State from Duluth — just the city and not St. Louis County. They found 40 ballots that had been excluded because voters and/or witnesses had failed to date their signature on the envelope. Well — then the turn to the relevant statutes, and it turns out there is no rule or standard requiring the dating of a signature, so what we have is 40 ballots excluded on the basis of a non-existant standard. I don’t think Coleman is going to get very far with the argument that such clerical errors not be corrected, given our state overall standard that all legitimate votes be counted. I really don’t believe the Supreme Court will be doing much with this except restating the standards that are already in statute law — and hopefully ordering the counties to follow those statutes.

That, in my opinion is the danger here. There is a need to “order” the counties to all conform with the existing standards, and sort and count the ballots that fall outside it. Otherwise it opens the whole thing up to an appeal in the Federal Court on equal protection grounds — and this thing doesn’t belong in Federal Court, it is a state election and should be dealt with via state laws and institutions. But the State Supreme Court needs to apply equal protection thinking as they process this.

Looks as if there will be many years worth of prosecutable offenses presented in that document. Maybe it will help cut the deficit if these criminals are prosecuted and they have to return the money they embezzled.

The Reconstruction Fraud

S.O.P.