Roland Burris, Jan. 5, 2009: “The Lord put his hands on the governor and said, ‘This is the person that has to go to Washington.’”

Michele Bachmann, Oct. 14, 2006: “He called me to run for United States Congress”

The Metropolitan Airports Commission told staff Tuesday to renegotiate a draft deal that would ease a repayment requirement of $245 million bond debt under promises Northwest made to keep its headquarters here, the Pioneer Press reports. Now that Delta owns Northwest and intends to break that promise, the MAC wants to exact new pledges on money and jobs — but how much and for how long is at issue.

Meanwhile, in the legislative session that started Tuesday, elected representatives will take up schemes to make money through airport privatization inspired by a lucrative, 99-year deal at Chicago’s Midway Airport. But, writes Conrad deFiebre at Minnesota 2020 (via), there’s a more local lesson for legislators in the sad tale of the Twin Cities’ once-public transit system that private owners (including the just-deceased Carl Pohlad) drove into the ground four decades ago, necessitating a new public bailout.

With those fixes made and one no-longer-timely sentence dispatched, the Pioneer Press set about breathing clean Minnesota air into a wheezy editorial from Wall Street for the (dubious) benefit of local readers, many of whom will see the column for what it is — tainted and undeserving.

Cleary, assistant chief judge at Ramsey County District Court, identifies himself as a WSJ subscriber of three decades’ standing who doesn’t always agree with the newspaper’s editorials but was particularly disappointed by this one, which he finds “long on partisan tone and short on accurate reporting.”

Read Cleary’s complete letter after the jump.

Dear Sirs:

As a subscriber of your newspaper for almost three decades, I don’t expect to always agree with your editorial viewpoint. Yet I am nevertheless very disappointed when I read an editorial long on partisan tone and short on accurate reporting.

As a member of the Minnesota State Canvassing Board, appointed pursuant to statute, I have attended all nine Board open meetings held the past seven weeks. I am knowledgeable about the proceedings as well as Minnesota’s election laws. Our members (two Supreme Court Justices, two District Court Judges, and Secretary of State Ritchie) came from all political backgrounds, openly expressed our opinions at the meetings, and can hardly be accurately described as “meek,” unless you mean “meek” by New York in-your-face standards. Your groundless attack on Secretary Ritchie reflects poorly on the author; Ritchie worked assiduously at avoiding partisanship in these proceedings.

As to the Board as a whole, all of our major votes were unanimous. We consistently followed the law in limiting our involvement to a non-adjudicative role, declining both candidate’s attempts to expand our mandate. Further, we painstakingly reviewed each challenged ballot, some more than once, to confirm that we were ruling in a consistent manner. One can only assume, based on the tone of the editorial, the numerous inaccuracies, and the over-the-top slam at Al Franken (”tainted and undeserving”?) that had Norm Coleman come out on top in this recount, the members of the Board would have been praised as “strong-willed, intelligent, and perceptive.” We won’t hold our breath waiting for that editorial to appear.

Edward J. Cleary

Assistant Chief Judge

Second Judicial District

Minnesota State Canvassing Board

Elias dismissed the Coleman suit, which alleges mistakes in the recently concluded statewide recount, as being without merit — “essentially the same thin gruel, warmed over leftovers we’ve all been served over the last few weeks.”

Elias took note of one ”new twist” — a Coleman contention that some ballots should be declared invalid because election judges failed to initial them. Otherwise, he dismissed Coleman’s allegations — double-counted duplicate ballots, missing ballots, potentially valid but twice-rejected absentee ballots — as old and in some cases disproven news.

“When you lose by 225 votes, you have to go mining for votes somewhere,” Elias said, calling the lawsuit’s renewed claims about 133 ballots missing in Minneapolis as the equivalent of believing the earth is flat.

“We are on the precipice of the next phase,” said Elias, an East Coast resident who may have hoped to retreat to warmer climes by now. He predicted the election contest — in which a three-judge panel hears complaints about the vote count — would begin with procedural motions concerning the court’s jurisdiction, the scope of its review, and how the contest will proceed.

Both sides would raise the issue of additional ballots that could be reviewed, he said, but nothing will change the result announced Monday, “a historic day … when Al Franken was certified the winner by the State Canvassing Board.”

The reason: “There are certainly not the votes there.”

“There is no one certified as the winner of this race,” referring to an election certification that’s separate from the result certified Monday by the State Canvassing Board that favored Democratic rival Al Franken by 225 votes. “I believe I’m going to win,” Coleman said.

Speaking to supporters and reporters at the State Office Building in St. Paul, Coleman said that “a true, accurate and valid result” was more important than resolving the two-month-old disputed election soon. “Something greater than expediency is at stake,” he said. “This is not just about me.”

Coleman’s call for a result that is “true, accurate and valid” seemed to answer Franken’s description of the recount as “long, fair and … thorough” — made during a Monday public statement in which Franken declared “victory.”

Here’s the prepared text of Coleman’s statement, released just after Tuesday’s press event:

ST. PAUL - Our Declaration of Independence states that government “derives its just powers from the consent of the governed.” Our government of laws is only as just as the elections that determine who make the decisions that affect us all. So we all have responsibility to make sure each vote counts in every election so the purity of democracy in our nation can be preserved and enhanced on our watch.

On November 4, 2008, nearly 3 million Minnesotans cast their votes for the United States Senate. The vast majority of those votes were clear and validly cast. Obviously, it was an extremely close vote, so Minnesota law required an automatic hand recount.

I want to express my deep appreciation to all of the election officials and volunteers who helped to make this election successful. I also want to thank the hundreds and hundreds of people who have been involved in this recount process for their work during a busy family time of the year for doing the work to get us to this point in the process.

But in the wisdom of Minnesota’s excellent election law, the local recount actions to date and those of the canvassing board are steps in the process of reaching a clear and unambiguous result all the people can accept as final. But as of today, not every valid vote has been counted and some have been counted twice.

So today I am announcing that I’ve instructed my legal team to file an election contest according to Minnesota law. Until these issues are settled, any attempt to seat someone who is not properly certified ignores the law, violates Senate precedent and usurps the will of the people of Minnesota.

There are several vital issues that must be resolved for the sake of this and future elections. Let me be very specific.

When double counted votes are included in a recount, an accurate and valid count cannot be obtained. When there are more votes counted in a single precinct than votes cast on the night of the election, an accurate and valid count cannot be obtained. When hundreds, if not thousands, of absentee ballots were wrongly rejected and still not included in the recount, an accurate and valid count cannot been obtained.

We are filing this contest to be absolutely sure that every valid vote was counted and no one’s voted was counted more than anyone else’s. The only way to do that is to guarantee that clear standards were applied fairly and uniformly throughout every single precinct of this state.

Under Minnesota Law there can be no valid election certificate issued if an election contest is filed. An election contest is the exact remedy the law provides to ensure that this recount and the associated inconsistencies that come with it are properly examined and properly resolved.

That’s what the Supreme Court said when it ruled the wrongly rejected absentee ballots that have still not been counted should be part of a contest. And it’s what members of the Canvassing Board communicated when they said they did not have the power in a recount to deal with the double counting of original and duplicate ballots.

While I understand there is a desire by a small number of people to simply move on, something greater than expediency is at stake here. As Americans we believe that every valid vote should count and that everybody’s vote is equally to everyone else’s.

Democracy is not a machine. It’s run by people working to obey the law as best they can. Sometimes it’s messy and inconvenient, and reaching the best conclusion is never quick because speed is not the first objective: fairness is. I’ve directed my team to move as quickly as possible to resolve these issues. But we will not permit the full process to be shortcut. That would only cast greater doubt and uncertainty over the final result.

A six year term is a long, long time. Crucial decisions will be made during that period on the economy, national security and the rights of all Americans. Minnesotans deserve 100% confidence that their Senator was fairly elected by all the people.

Speaking personally for just a moment: it has been an enormous privilege for me and my family to be involved in serving the people of Minnesota for over 30 years, the last six in the United State Senate. I hope to keep doing so. I have been humbled by the privilege given to me, but I want to make it clear: nobody is indispensible. It’s the will of the people that really matters.

This is not just about me. The eyes of the nation are on the state that we love and we need to show them that Minnesota has done everything we can to make sure that we protect every voter’s right. At this moment, I may not have a working office in D.C. or in St. Paul, but I still have my voice in Minnesota, and I certainly plan to use it.

We need to get this right for all of us: a true, accurate and valid result of the Minnesota United States Senate Recount so all Minnesotans can have a Senator with the full credibility to lead and serve.

Thank you and God bless.

Here is the text of a statement released today by the Austin Informant Working Group, a follow-up to the group’s Dec. 31 statement that, among other things, cites an Oct. 29 Pioneer Press article outing Darby.

Austin RNC Informant is Provocateur Not Hero

A group of Austin activists today released their conclusions from reviewing over 70 pages of FBI documents obtained through a legal case regarding alleged actions to protest the Republican National Convention (RNC). From reading the documents, and from their own experience with him, these activists have concluded that the FBI informant Brandon Darby did not heroically intervene to stop violence. Rather it appears that he actively sought out people that he could manipulate and entrap. The two Texas men that Darby was most closely associated with during the convention, Bradley Crowder and David McKay, are accused of making Molotov cocktails and have been in jail since early September. Their trial is set for January 26. The disclosure of Brandon Darby as the informant casts further doubt on the charges against these two men.

According to the FBI’s documents, Darby, posing as an activist, had been covertly gathering information for the FBI since at least February 2007, twelve months before he ever met Crowder or McKay or knew of any plans for the RNC. “As an older seasoned activist, Darby had a lot of sway over Crowder and McKay, making them susceptible to his often militant rhetoric,” said Gabby Hicks, who was in St. Paul with Darby during the Convention. “He was always the one to suggest violence, when the rest of us clearly disagreed with those strategies.”

Darby has been characterized by many people who have known and worked with him as both persuasive and manipulative, with a history of provocation, instigation, and incitement. According to Lisa Fithian, who worked with Darby for years, “Brandon was always provoking discord and aggression, in the anti-war movement in Austin in 2003, in protests in Houston against Halliburton, and in disaster relief at Common Ground in New Orleans.  I worked with Darby in all of those places and saw the disruption he caused.”

The FBI documents make it clear that Darby did not restrict his informing to people he alleges were planning illegal activities. He also gathered information on numerous people who were engaged in lawful activism; including some who had no plans to attend the Republican Convention. “The wider net cast by Darby in his information gathering shows that he was part of an FBI campaign to suppress political dissent and activism,” said Will Potter, an award-winning independent journalist. “By gathering information on law abiding activists and then defending his actions as stopping violence, Darby contributes to the public perception that political dissent is criminal, which has a chilling effect on free speech.”

Because of Darby’s leadership role and his militant rhetoric, two impressionable young men, who have been held without bail since September, now face 7 to 10 years in prison. As the prosecution prepares for trial, friends and family of McKay and Crowder are hoping for a not guilty verdict. “We miss him a lot,” said Mckay’s father. “Every night David calls –- at this point those calls mean everything to me.”

In winning the most votes by a slim margin, Franken is “tainted,” according to Republican state Sen. Geoff Michel. And while Michel won’t find an argument with that assertion from the Wall Street Journal’s editorial writers (from whom he may have taken inspiration for his choice of words), history suggests that a slim winning margin won’t hurt Franken at the polls six years from now.

Eric Ostermeier, writing at his Smart Politics blog from the Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, takes a look back at past victors in Minnesota elections to the U.S. Senate and finds that “there is virtually no difference in the re-election success rate of those who won narrowly and those who won by large margins.”

In fact, Ostermeier reports, senators who won by double-digit margins did slightly worse in the next election cycle than those who won by narrower margins. His conclusion:

In short, if past is prologue (and all things being equal), should Franken prevail and choose to run in 2014, he would seem to have about a 67 percent chance of winning reelection, as 15 of 22 Senators have done before him.

If it seems a bit early (or even a bit nutty) to run the numbers already on Franken’s chances in 2014 on a day when senators of his own party thought better of even trying to seat him a first time — well, it was early. A date-stamp reveals that Ostermeier posted his electoral research on Tuesday, Jan. 6, at 2:38 a.m.

Franken claiming victory outside his Minneapolis home. Photo: Stefan Lund

Al Franken, calling himself “the next senator from Minnesota,” said Monday afternoon he is ready to go to Washington, D.C., to get to work just as soon as possible.

But Franken didn’t respond to reporters’ shouted questions about exactly when he would go to Washington and retreated up the front steps of his downtown Minneapolis townhouse with his wife, Franni, and campaign aides.

In a brief statement in which he twice referred to his “victory,” Franken also acknowledged just how close his 225-vote margin of victory over former Sen. Norm Coleman was. “I didn’t win the support of every Minnesotan. I’m going to have to earn it,” he said. “I work for you now and I will work hard to earn your confidence.”

Franken paid tribute to Coleman with a note of sympathy that recalled former Minnesota Gov. Karl Rolvaag’s statement after the state’s last big recount in 1962. “I know that this isn’t easy” for the Colemans, Franken said, because his own family had faced tough days since the election. But he described the recount process as “long, fair and … thorough.”

With a nod toward threats of lawsuits and filibusters, Franken said he hoped Minnesota would continue to be served by two senators “without interruption.” Whatever happens on that score, Franken said he would “focus all my attention and all my energies” on working on issues facing Minnesotans — including an economy he said was in the “worst crisis since the Great Depression.”

Franken’s appearance was one of a very few he’s made since Election Day, and his statement included offerings of thanks to staff, supporters and others that “I wish I’d been able to give on Election Night.” He also thanked election workers in a state that he said had shown the world it “takes its democracy seriously.”

As Franken ended with a pledge to get to work, a woman passerby who had stopped to listen shouted out, “Yeah, get on the job!” From the tone of her voice, it wasn’t entirely clear whether she was a Franken fan, a Coleman backer or simply another citizen ready for the recount to end.

Here is the prepared text of Franken’s statement as released by his campaign:

It has been a remarkable couple of months. Our recount brought national attention
to Minnesota, and what Americans saw is that we take our democracy seriously. Our
recount process was long, it was fair, and it was thorough. We should all be proud
of our state, and we should all be grateful for the incredible hard work and
dedication of all of our elections officials, from the state canvassing board and
the Secretary of State’s office to the officials in the cities and counties and
precincts of Minnesota.

After 62 days, after the careful and painstaking hand inspection of nearly 3
million ballots, after hours and hours of hard work by elections officials and
volunteers across the state, I am proud and humbled to stand before you as the next
Senator from Minnesota.

This victory is incredibly humbling - not just because it was so narrow, but
because of the tremendous responsibility it gives me on behalf of the people of
Minnesota.

While the recount process played out, the challenges facing our state and our
nation have only grown. With tensions in the Middle East reaching the boiling
point, our economy facing its worst crisis since the 1930s, and Minnesota’s middle
class families being squeezed harder than ever, it’s clear that we have a lot of
important work to do.

I want you all to know that I’m ready to go to Washington and get to work just as
soon as possible. And I look forward to joining President-Elect Obama and Senator
Klobuchar in getting our country moving in the right direction again.

I know this is not an easy day for Norm Coleman and his family, and I know that
because Franni and I and the kids have had plenty of time over the past two months
to contemplate the possibility that this election would turn out differently. Norm
has worked hard for this state and this country, and I hope to ask for his help to
ensure that Minnesotans can continue to count on receiving excellent constituent
services from their two Senators without interruption.

I also know that this was a hard-fought victory, and that I didn’t win the support
of every Minnesotan. I’m going to have to earn it by being a Senator who fights for
every Minnesotan, whether you voted for me or not. And I want every Minnesotan to
hear me say: I work for you now. And I will work hard to earn your confidence.

There may still be additional legal proceedings related to our recount. But I’m
now in the business of serving the people of Minnesota. And the best way I can
serve the people of Minnesota right now is to focus all my attention and all my
energies on getting to work for them on the issues we’ll be facing together.

I would like to close by doing something I wish I’d gotten a chance to do properly
on Election Night, and that is to thank some people. My amazing staff and
supporters across the state who made this victory possible and stuck with us this
whole way. All the volunteers who woke up the morning after Election Day and got
right back to work to help our recount effort. Our state’s dedicated elections
officials, our tremendous congressional delegation, and our fantastic Senator, Amy
Klobuchar, who continues to be a mentor and an inspiration. And, of course, my
beautiful wife Franni and our amazing family.

For our state, today marked the end of a long process that will forever be a part
of Minnesota history. But today is also a beginning. The history of our country
will be forever altered by what we do together to address the challenges we face
together. So, with tremendous gratitude for the victory we have won, I’m ready to
get to work.

Thank you.

Clockwise from upper left: Coleman, Franken, Rolvaag, Andersen

It would seem out of character at this point for Norm Coleman to concede the race for the Senate seat he occupied until Saturday, even after this morning’s negative ruling from the Minnesota Supreme Court and the certification of the vote in favor of rival Al Franken by the State Canvassing Board this afternoon. But it could happen — just read between the lines of his recount lawyer’s remarks yesterday, or listen to former senator and Vice President Walter Mondale today. A close reading of what Coleman recount attorney Fritz Knaak said on Sunday suggests that it’s Coleman’s choice whether to proceed with an election contest. And that implies that Coleman might at least be considering not contesting the election — in other words, conceding.

That’s exactly what Mondale had in mind when he told Minnesota Public Radio listeners today that he recommends the example of Republican Gov. Elmer L. Andersen, who, as the incumbent in Minnesota’s last big statewide recount in 1962–63, bowed out rather than pursue an appeal to the state’s highest court. “When we got to a point like this,” Mondale recalled (and he was not only there but, as the state’s popular attorney general, was very nearly a candidate himself), “Elmer Andersen said, ‘No, this has gone on long enough.”

The parallel isn’t exact, because by the time Andersen conceded it was March 23, 1963, and the election had already been a three-judge review of the sort that would look at the current vote if Coleman files for an election contest. But the candidates’ words from that time could stand as a model (or, more likely, as a contrast) for Minnesota’s current recount rivals.

Gov. Elmer L. Andersen:

Today ends one chapter, admittedly a shorter chapter than I intended, but there are more to be written. I am disappointed but not the least discouraged; I am defeated but not the least disheartened.

Lt. Gov. Karl Rolvaag (of the Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, who succeeded Andersen as governor after Andersen’s concession):

I am sure the decision made this afternoon by Governor Andersen was a most difficult one. Had he chosen to go on and exercise his right or appeal in this matter, I hope that no voice would have been raised against that decision. I do not believe it would be possible for any person to adequately describe the tremendous pressures, the anxieties and the physical demands placed upon the parties to this recount action. … While at no time during these long months did I ever despair of emerging the victor, there were times when the situation became seemingly unendurable. I would assume that through these many months Mr. Andersen was constantly beset by similar pressures which only he could begin to describe. To continue in office in the face of the vicissitudes of the contest we have just completed must be an agony of its own.