If Franken wins this court battle and Pawlenty still won't sign - IMPEACH HIM

[LynneSin]

I like this synopsis from Electoral-Vote.com. If the Minnesota State Supreme Court favors Franken and orders Pawlenty to sign the election cert but Pawlenty refuses, then the Minnesota Congress has a strong case for impeaching Pawlenty.


http://www.electoral-vote.com/
Currently, Al Franken (D) is leading by 312 votes. Basically, the court has two choices. First, it could uphold the canvassing board, Secretary of State, and lower court and declare Franken to be the winner. Such a verdict would likely be accompanied by an order to Gov. Tim Pawlenty (R-MN) to sign the election certificate, which Senate Republicans would urge him not to do pending yet more appeals. If he refused to sign it, in principle the Minnesota House, which has 87 DFLers and 47 Republicans could impeach him and the Minnesota Senate, which has 46 DFLer's and 21 Republicans could convict him. Pawlenty, who is up for reelection in 2010 and has been mentioned as a presidential candidate for 2012, might not want to risk this and might sign despite the pressure.

[peacetalksforall]

1. Starting now ---- live ----www.theuptake.org

Send a donation to this new service - the uptake.

[babylonsister]

2. I do wonder if Pawlenty will be treading very carefully due to

his presidential aspirations. I guess we'll find out soon.

[trotsky]

4. It's lose-lose for him though.

If he refuses to sign and decides to fight, he'll be seen by the general electorate as bull-headed and partisan.

If he signs, he'll piss off the rabid base, sabotaging his ability to win them over for primary victories.

The political calculation here says that without winning the base to secure the nomination, you don't have to worry at all about the general electorate, so I fully expect him to be the arrogant partisan prick that he's always been, and fight it.

[LynneSin]

6. The best thing for Pawlenty is that the Minn. Supreme Court rules he must sign it

Then he can say he did not want to be in contempt of court or risk impeachment. Then the republicans can put the blame on 'activist judges' and take the heat off of Pawlenty

[Wizard777]

3. This is a Senate election. Unlike a Presidential election. SCOTUS can't decide this.

So if it's not settled after The Minn. Supreme Court, It'll have to be decided by the Senate.

[LynneSin]

5. Oh anyone who believes that is a fool

You think that's going to stop the republicans and Norm Coleman? Do you think someone like Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito or Antonin Scalia won't help out their cronies. And Bush V. Gore was NEVER a federal issue - that should have ended in the Florida State Supreme Court too since it was a STATE issue and not a federal one.

As long as their is a court with friendly justices for the republicans out there they'll try this case to death.

[Wizard777]

7. Frankins lawyers simply need to contest the High Courts Jurisdiction.

Because in this case they don't have jurisdiction. The Senate does. They might hear the case just long enough to render some bright lines in this area. Decide that all state appeals have been exhausted and this election must now be decided by the Senate in accordance to Article I, Section 5. of the US Constitution. That SCOTUS has no authority to hear the case beyond determining that all state appeals have been exhausted.

[LynneSin]

8. Again, anyone who believes that is a fool

You think people like Scalia, Thomas and Alito actually follow the constitution?

If they did Bush V. Gore would have never made it to the Supreme Court WHICH was another state issue NOT federal.

I'm not doubting what you say is true. I'm just pointing out the obvious. If Coleman wants it to go to the Supreme Court, one of their cronies on the bench will see to it that it's heard.

[Wizard777]

9. The Senate also has Jurisdiction in Impeaching the overreaching Justice.

Ya think Obama might like to make another appointment? WEG

[LynneSin]

10. Yeah and that impeachment thing has worked out so well with Bush

:eyes: