Nonprofit, nonpartisan journalism. Supported by readers.


Franken-Coleman recount: A dissent on Wall Street Journal op-ed piece

Al Franken lawyer Marc Elias begs to differ with colleague David Brauer’s analysis of Professor Michael Paulsen’s Wall Street Journal op-ed piece today.

When asked about the Paulsen piece, Elias said: “It’s important to realize that the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal has been attempting to undermine the credibility of this election now for weeks … I stopped writing letters responding to their false editorials months ago.”

As for the notion of an electoral do-over that Paulsen suggests …

Elias reiterated what’s happened already: The State Canvassing Board, with two Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices on it, declared Franken the candidate with the most votes; Coleman has lawfully contested the election; a trial will ensue; the process needs to come to an orderly conclusion before a hand-picked three-judge panel.

Because of all that,  “I don’t think we’re headed towards a special election,” Elias said. “But I think former Sen. Coleman is near the end of the rope here.”

You can also learn about all our free newsletter options.

Comments (1)

  1. Submitted by Spadafora Spadafora on 01/16/2009 - 02:16 pm.

    I don’t care who the “hand-picked three-judge panel” says is the winner.

    If members of this panel have any commonsense, they’ll decide a runoff election is the only way to settle this senate race.

Leave a Reply