Minnesota Democrats are corrupt.
That is almost a given, of course, but in recent years the corruption has become blatant, with hundreds of millions of dollars in fraud committed under Democrat Governor Tim Walz. The outgoing U.S. Attorney--who has been prosecuting corruption because state prosecutors won't, outright says the state has a fraud problem.
Heard of him? Yes, that effeminate buffoon who prances around like a drag queen emulating Dylan Mulvaney doing ballet is my governor, and according to a running count at American Experiment, over $500 million in tax dollars have been stolen under his watch through fraud and corruption.
The new hotness in the corruption racket in my state has to do with election fraud, stealing legislative seats, unlawful "swearing-in" of DFL legislators to avoid showing up for work, and the Democrats absconding because they don't control the legislative body.
It is a complete temper tantrum caused by the DFL (our Democratic Party) running a candidate illegally and trying to steal another seat by installing a legislator despite his having been "elected" through--I kid you not--literally throwing ballots in the garbage.
Minnesota government dysfunction continues...
— Clarity (@covid_clarity) January 13, 2025
Democrats hold secret swearing-in ceremony before they boycott the new legislative session.
MN Democrats are refusing to allow Republicans to take control of the House with Republicans holding a 67-66 advantage ahead of a Jan 28… pic.twitter.com/VUfEa1xXrW
If all the seats were filled the state House of Representatives would be tied 67-67, but of course, those House seats are up in the air legally with a special election coming up and the Republicans having a temporary majority. As the majority party they have the right to appoint a Speaker of the House and make committee assignments, and they are trying to do so.
It's outrageous that Tim Walz has given Minnesota Democrat legislators blanket approval for a secret, behind-closed-doors, swearing-in last night (no public, no media) and a green light to not show up for work on Tuesday, the first day of the legislative session. Minnesotans… https://t.co/O2vKRO8zA6
— Pete Stauber (@PeteStauber) January 13, 2025
Except...Democrats are striking. Yes, legislators are going on strike. And they want to have their pay, perks, and to deny Republicans a quorum so they won't even show up to get sworn in, throwing everything into chaos.
Minnesota House Democrats sworn into office early as they prepare to boycott the legislative session https://t.co/11dQUff5un
— The Minnesota Star Tribune (@StarTribune) January 13, 2025
Their creative "solution" was to find a corrupt former judge to hold a secret swearing-in ceremony over the weekend--even before the official start of the legislative session and likely violating the law. They of course included the member who won by trashcan, and claim that without these duly sworn-in legislators, Republicans don't have a quorum.
WATCH: Minnesota House DFL leader Melissa Hortman blames "Republican activists" for needing to hold a swearing-in ceremony without alerting the public pic.twitter.com/FVqEYOBKwD
— Anthony Gockowski (@AntGockowski) January 13, 2025
That's bunk, if you follow the law and read the Minnesota Constitution, which on its face rebuts this, and the whole issue was even debated at the Minnesota Constitutional Convention.
This press release from Minnesota Democrats is riddled with lies.
— Walter Hudson (@WalterHudson) January 13, 2025
1) ”Democrats are prepared to deny the 68-member quorum required to conduct House business...”
No where in either the state constitution or state law is a quorum defined as 68 members. Rather, the constitution… https://t.co/BDTyA4TDFg pic.twitter.com/DCIFrN5Rah
Of course, this is Minnesota, where "law" generally means what the Democrats want it to. They have a near stranglehold on the judiciary, although they occasionally lose on cases where the facts are so obvious that any judge would be laughed at if he ruled for the Democrats. That was clear in the illegal candidate, who lied about where he lived.
EDITED FOR ACCURACY: "Minnesota House DFL members staged an insurrection, holding an illegal oath ceremony in violation of the MN Constitution, Statute and House rules".
— Mitch "The Wałęsa Project" Berg 🇺🇸🇳🇴🇪🇪🇦🇷 (@mitchpberg) January 13, 2025
Fixed that for you. https://t.co/ICSB1lc8q3
My friend over at Powerline John Hinderaker wrote a piece on the whole thing and as a lawyer he thinks the case is clear-cut, but perhaps he has more faith in the objectivity of Minnesota judges than I do:
Democrats are panicked over the prospect that they will lose control over one house of Minnesota’s legislature, and they have determined on a desperate strategy. The 2024 legislative session begins on Tuesday, and all 66 Democrats are going to refuse to show up for work. Their theory is that by hiding out, they will prevent the establishment of a quorum, and thereby disable Minnesota’s House (effectively, the entire legislature) from doing any business. They hope that at some point in the future, they will win a special election in 40B, at which time they say they will go back to work. Meanwhile, they intend to continue drawing their pay as legislators.
Will that contemptible strategy work? I don’t think so. The controlling constitutional provision is Article IV, Section 13:
Quorum. A majority of each house constitutes a quorum to transact business, but a smaller number may adjourn from day to day and compel the attendance of absent members in the manner and under the penalties it may provide.
In my legal opinion, the language is perfectly clear. Currently, there are 133 (not 134) members of the Minnesota House. Section 13 doesn’t say the majority of districts, of which there are 134, it says the majority of the house, which has 133 members. So 67 votes are a majority, and a quorum.
Bill Walsh over at American Experiment gave a nice summary of the crisis:
Minnesota is headed straight for a Constitutional CRISIS….will any House Democrats show up to represent their constituents?! pic.twitter.com/Ucfj81H8z8
— Center of the American Experiment (@MNThinkTank) January 13, 2025
According to John the law isn't even ambiguous, but our non-lawyer Secretary of State gave an advisory opinion saying that a quorum requires a majority of all potential legislators, not all seated legislators. He has no authority nor precedent to make this argument, but the Minnesota Supreme Court may use the advisory opinion as a fig leaf to avoid harming the Democrats.
Simon is a Democrat, by the way. He used to be a DFL House member, in fact--an incredibly loyal one at that.
Under Minnesota law, Minnesota’s Secretary of State, Steve Simon, has the ceremonial duty of opening each annual session of the Minnesota House. (The Lieutenant Governor convenes the Senate.) This duty is entirely ceremonial; Simon has no authority to wield executive or legislative power of any sort, or issue any rulings. Nevertheless, Simon, a partisan hack, has written an eight-page “legal opinion” in which he argues that 68 votes should be required for a quorum. He sets a number of angels dancing on the heads of a number of pins, but has to admit that there is no controlling authority supporting his interpretation.
And, in fact, the only relevant authority is to the contrary. During Minnesota’s Constitutional Convention, the question of what constitutes a quorum came up. The consensus was that the language, as now contained in the Article IV, was clear:
Mr. Morgan: I conceive that the word “majority” means a majority of the members sworn in. … There can be no other meaning attached to it, for we frequently find ourselves without a quorum, which is, less than a majority of the members sworn in.
Based on that consensus, an amendment to the existing language was voted down.
This same interpretation prevails at the federal level. In language virtually identical to Minnesota’s Constitution, Article I of the U.S. Constitution provides that “…a Majority of each [house] shall constitute a Quorum to do Business.” The U.S. Constitution is interpreted in exactly the manner that I set forth above:
A quorum of the House is defined as a majority of those Members sworn and living, whose membership has not been terminated by resignation or by House action. Manual §53; 4 Hinds §§ 2889, 2890; 6 Cannon §638; Deschler Ch 20 § 1; § 5, infra. Thus, when there are no vacancies, a quorum to do business is 218 Members. When the membership has been reduced by reason of death, resignation, expulsion, disqualification, or removal to 432, a quorum to do business is 217 Members. 94-2, June 18, 1976, p 19312. This long-standing practice was codified in the 108th Congress by adoption of clause 5(c) (now 5(d)) of rule XX.
Emphasis added. In Minnesota, we have a vacancy in District 40B. Why? Because the Democratic candidate cheated and got caught. Like the federal Constitution, Minnesota’s Constitution provides that while there are 133 certified members, not 134, 67 votes are a majority and a quorum.
The whole thing is a mess, which is exactly how Democrats like things unless they are in charge. When they are, everything gets all Nancy Pelosi-like and Democrats vote in lockstep to screw taxpayers.
— Peter Callaghan (@CallaghanPeter) January 13, 2025
Of particular note--and likely one of the reasons why Democrats are in a panic--is that they have made exposing Minnesota corruption their top priority. With over half a billion dollars going up in smoke under Tim Walz, you can bet they don't want too much discussion about the matter.
Democrats. There is no depth of depravity to which they will not stoop if it suits them.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member