Conquer Club

The six-month election recount that turned former "Saturday Night Live" comedian Al Franken into a U.S. senator may have been decided by convicted felons who voted illegally in Minnesota's Twin Cities.

That's the finding of an 18-month study conducted by Minnesota Majority, a conservative watchdog group, which found that at least 341 convicted felons in largely Democratic Minneapolis-St. Paul voted illegally in the 2008 Senate race between Franken, a Democrat, and his Republican opponent, then-incumbent Sen. Norm Coleman.

The final recount vote in the race, determined six months after Election Day, showed Franken beat Coleman by 312 votes -- fewer votes than the number of felons whose illegal ballots were counted, according to Minnesota Majority's newly released study, which matched publicly available conviction lists with voting records.

Furthermore, the report charges that efforts to get state and federal authorities to act on its findings have been "stonewalled."

"We aren't trying to change the result of the last election. That legally can't be done," said Dan McGrath, Minnesota Majority's executive director. "We are just trying to make sure the integrity of the next election isn't compromised."

He said his group was largely ignored when it turned over a list of hundreds of names to prosecutors in two of the state's largest counties, Ramsey and Hennepin, where fraud seemed to be the greatest.

A spokesman for both county attorneys' offices belittled the information, saying it was "just plain wrong" and full of errors, which prompted the group to go back and start an in-depth look at the records.

"What we did this time is irrefutable," McGrath said. "We took the voting lists and matched them with conviction lists and then went back to the records and found the roster lists, where voters sign in before walking to the voting booth, and matched them by hand.

"The only way we can be wrong is if someone with the same first, middle and last names, same year of birth as the felon, and living in the same community, has voted. And that isn't very likely."

The report said that in Hennepin County, which in includes Minneapolis, 899 suspected felons had been matched on the county's voting records, and the review showed 289 voters were conclusively matched to felon records. The report says only three people in the county have been charged with voter fraud so far.

A representative of the Hennepin County attorney's office, who declined to give her name, said "there was no one in the office today to talk about the charges."

But the report got a far different review in Ramsey County, which contains St. Paul. Phil Carruthers of the Ramsey County attorney's office said his agency had taken the charges "very seriously" and found that the Minnesota Majority "had done a good job in their review."

The report says that in Ramsey, 460 names on voting records were matched with felon lists, and a further review found 52 were conclusive matches.

Carruthers attributed differences in the numbers to Minnesota Majority's lack of access to nonpublic information, such as exact birth dates and other court records. For example, he said, "public records might show a felon was given 10 years probation, but internal records the county attorney has might show that the probation period was cut to five and the felon was eligible to vote."

Carruthers said Ramsey County is still investigating all the names and has asked that 15 investigators be hired to complete the process. "So far we have charged 28 people with felonies, have 17 more under review and have 182 cases still open," he said. "And there is a good chance we may match or even exceed their numbers."

McGrath says the report shows that more still has to be done.

"Prosecutors have to act more swiftly in prosecuting cases from the 2008 election to deter fraud in the future," he said, "and the state has to make sure that existing system, that flags convicted felons so voting officials can challenge them at the ballot, is effective. In 90 percent of the cases we looked at, the felons weren't flagged."

"If the state had done that," he said, "things might be very different today."

Bones2484 wrote:And all 341 voted for Franken?

Only 15 (4%) of them needed to have voted for Coleman for this to be a non-issue.

Phatscotty wrote:I still want to know where all those votes came from that they found in the trunks of a few cars...

Phatscotty wrote:I still want to know where all those votes came from that they found in the trunks of a few cars...

rockfist wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:I still want to know where all those votes came from that they found in the trunks of a few cars...

Voter fraud straight from the Democrat playbook 101.

Woodruff wrote:

rockfist wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:I still want to know where all those votes came from that they found in the trunks of a few cars...

Voter fraud straight from the Democrat playbook 101.

Was that the same playbook that Richard Nixon ran plays out of, or was it a different one?

Woodruff wrote:

rockfist wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:I still want to know where all those votes came from that they found in the trunks of a few cars...

Voter fraud straight from the Democrat playbook 101.

Was that the same playbook that Richard Nixon ran plays out of, or was it a different one?

Phatscotty wrote:someone else may have done it first so that makes it OKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK

Phatscotty wrote:

Woodruff wrote:

rockfist wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:I still want to know where all those votes came from that they found in the trunks of a few cars...

Voter fraud straight from the Democrat playbook 101.

Was that the same playbook that Richard Nixon ran plays out of, or was it a different one?

someone else may have done it first so that makes it OKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK

Metsfanmax wrote:Meh. Bush won the 2000 election because non-felons were incorrectly labeled as felons in Florida, so I would find it amusing if Franken won because felons were incorrectly labeled as non-felons.

THORNHEART wrote:yourfunny soul

King Doctor wrote:

THORNHEART wrote:your funny soul

Post reported for:

1. Flaming
2. Atrocious grammar

THORNHEART wrote:Woodruff and his mulitple persona doctor account enjoy these little banters lets see here is what they said in short to attempt to look smart.

Rockfist = democratic playbook.

Woodruff = isnt that what nixon used (nixon who wasnt really a true conservative anyways and a national disgrace)

Phatty = so if some one is wrong in the past its ok to do it again.

King Doctor = Bush you mean big bad bush (who actually won quite fairly and heaven help us had Gore actually won)

King Doctor = Voter fraud hasnt been proven (Um the dems have no qualms using voter fraud get real here) EVEN if fraud happened it surely wasnt orchastrated by a democrat!!!!!! Much less he even KNEW about it I mean come on democrats stand for all that is good and holy they would never let scandal blemish them. blah blah then he brings up fox...omg seriously get real. Lets not talk about new media...CNN...

Woodruff = so you dont have a good response....(to what woody your pathetic attempt to go back 30 years to nixon to alleviate current wrong doing?)

Doctor jumps in to make another snide comment that doesnt support or help his arguement in anyway...(see a general rule with liberals if its funny than it makes a good arguement no matter if it is relevant or if it makes practical sense or is even true)


And there you have it....Woody and his pal King Doctor...with all their humor sarcasm and wit ...make funny and sarcastic attacks but when you look at what was actually said there is no substance. Which is most liberals...no substance just alot of words hate and bitterness towards Fox news....I wonder if its cause CNN has the lowest viewing ratings of all time...and Fox is the most watched usa news station?

THORNHEART wrote:Woodruff and his mulitple persona doctor account enjoy these little banters lets see here is what they said in short to attempt to look smart.

Rockfist = democratic playbook.

Woodruff = isnt that what nixon used (nixon who wasnt really a true conservative anyways and a national disgrace)

Phatty = so if some one is wrong in the past its ok to do it again.

King Doctor = Bush you mean big bad bush (who actually won quite fairly and heaven help us had Gore actually won)

King Doctor = Voter fraud hasnt been proven (Um the dems have no qualms using voter fraud get real here) EVEN if fraud happened it surely wasnt orchastrated by a democrat!!!!!! Much less he even KNEW about it I mean come on democrats stand for all that is good and holy they would never let scandal blemish them. blah blah then he brings up fox...omg seriously get real. Lets not talk about new media...CNN...

Woodruff = so you dont have a good response....(to what woody your pathetic attempt to go back 30 years to nixon to alleviate current wrong doing?)

Doctor jumps in to make another snide comment that doesnt support or help his arguement in anyway...(see a general rule with liberals if its funny than it makes a good arguement no matter if it is relevant or if it makes practical sense or is even true)


And there you have it....Woody and his pal King Doctor...with all their humor sarcasm and wit ...make funny and sarcastic attacks but when you look at what was actually said there is no substance. Which is most liberals...no substance just alot of words hate and bitterness towards Fox news....I wonder if its cause CNN has the lowest viewing ratings of all time...and Fox is the most watched usa news station?

THORNHEART wrote:

King Doctor wrote:

THORNHEART wrote:yourfunny soul

Post reported for:

1. Flaming
2. Atrocious grammar

post reported for spurious report of my post

Bones2484 wrote:

THORNHEART wrote:

King Doctor wrote:

THORNHEART wrote:yourfunny soul

Post reported for:

1. Flaming
2. Atrocious grammar

post reported for spurious report of my post

Rather funny that your initial post wasn't reported (that is, until I just reported it) but the one by King Doctor actually was. Haven't you been banned already for spurious reports?

King Doctor wrote:

THORNHEART wrote:Woodruff and his mulitple persona doctor account enjoy these little banters lets see here is what they said in short to attempt to look smart.

Rockfist = democratic playbook.

Woodruff = isnt that what nixon used (nixon who wasnt really a true conservative anyways and a national disgrace)

Phatty = so if some one is wrong in the past its ok to do it again.

King Doctor = Bush you mean big bad bush (who actually won quite fairly and heaven help us had Gore actually won)

King Doctor = Voter fraud hasnt been proven (Um the dems have no qualms using voter fraud get real here) EVEN if fraud happened it surely wasnt orchastrated by a democrat!!!!!! Much less he even KNEW about it I mean come on democrats stand for all that is good and holy they would never let scandal blemish them. blah blah then he brings up fox...omg seriously get real. Lets not talk about new media...CNN...

Woodruff = so you dont have a good response....(to what woody your pathetic attempt to go back 30 years to nixon to alleviate current wrong doing?)

Doctor jumps in to make another snide comment that doesnt support or help his arguement in anyway...(see a general rule with liberals if its funny than it makes a good arguement no matter if it is relevant or if it makes practical sense or is even true)


And there you have it....Woody and his pal King Doctor...with all their humor sarcasm and wit ...make funny and sarcastic attacks but when you look at what was actually said there is no substance. Which is most liberals...no substance just alot of words hate and bitterness towards Fox news....I wonder if its cause CNN has the lowest viewing ratings of all time...and Fox is the most watched usa news station?

This post makes no sense whatsoever.

I am reminded of the deluded, misguided and paranoid ramblings that the hobo who resides outside my nearest supermarket utters during his short moments of conciousness.