Comments on: Franken-Coleman Update, 01/27/09 (PM Edition): Hey! I Said “Better Tools, Please!”

By: cinnamonape

cinnamonape — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 00:42:38 +0000

I’m actually wondering if the Court will cite a number of criminal actions in their decision that places Coleman and his lawyers in legal jeopardy…falsification of documents to be used as evidence in court, an attempt to violate the state voting laws by introducing a fraudulent ballot filled in by other than the actual voter, etc.

By: cinnamonape

cinnamonape — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 00:39:21 +0000

Where the hell is the money comin’ from? Well there is some evidence that a good chunk of it might be coming from certain large corporations who don’t want the Employee Free Choice Act passed…folks like BankAmerica, Citibank, AIG, Home Depot, Walmart, etc. Coleman was one of their Golden Boys in stopping that Union-related effort. If Franken got in the filibuster might be broken.

By: Hmmm

Hmmm — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 22:45:30 +0000

Why does the GOP have their A-Team on this? Is something non-obvious at stake?

By: RickMassimo

RickMassimo — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 20:35:10 +0000

Oh, and it’s the crack Coleman team that Castellanos praises that presented, as evidence, futzed-with photocopies of properly rejected (i.e., not fifth pile) absentee ballots, photocopies that had both its marks and the county elections officials’ marks on them — and which the Coleman team had erased in its efforts to clean them up for the election contest, an act that the three-judge Election Contest Court did not particularly appreciate.

OK, seriously, doesn’t the court at that point say “You tampered with evidence, you lose - election over, Franken wins”?

By: Watt4Bob

Watt4Bob — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:59:05 +0000

It looks as if Colemans legal team trying to single-handedly revive our ailing economy, at least for trial lawyers.

They do seem like a lot of guys, digging holes and then filling them again.

Hey, wait a minute, aren’t the GOP the same guys who want tort reform because trial lawyers make way too much money bringing baseless law suits?

By: Knut

Knut — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:57:20 +0000

I would imagine that the respectable local lawyers don’t want anything more to do with the case. After all, they have to live with the judges when it’s all over. The last thing you want to be — at least in my jurisdiction — is on the bad side of a judge.

By: BooRadley

BooRadley — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:52:59 +0000

Thanks PW.

digg

By: perris

perris — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:45:39 +0000

how long does this proceeding take and what can coleman do next?

they are clearly clogging the cogs for clogging purposes, how many more moves are tolerated?

By: Bustednuckles

Bustednuckles — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:45:22 +0000

Byzantine.

Sitting here shaking my head trying to follow that forking mess.

By: Hugh

Hugh — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:42:24 +0000

BTW AIG is paying out $450 million in bonuses to its Financial Products Unit which tanked the company selling derivatives. That’s on average more than a million apiece for each employee. US taxpayers have sunk some $150 billion in AIG to cover the bad decisions of these guys. Obscene is getting to be the default word to describe the government and industry’s approach to the meltdown.

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpoi.....in_bon.php