Live from Minneapolis with John Fund

After his lunch appearance that John Hinderaker writes about in the adjacent post, National Review columnist John Fund debated Hennenpin County Attorney Mike Freeman on the subject of voter fraud and the proposed Minnesota constitutional amendment that I have been writing about in the “Ritchie ratchet” series of posts. When I caught up with him a few minutes before the event got started, John Fund graciously asked me: “Aren’t you up to part 4?”

The debate was sponsored by the Federalist Society chapter at the University of St. Thomas Law School, the site of the debate, and by the Center of the American Experiment, which has just published an important paper on the proposed amendment (summary here).

John Fund is the co-author, with Hans Von Spakovsky, of Who’s Counting? How Fraudsters and Bureaucrats Put Your Vote At Risk. He knows what he’s talking about. Mike Freeman gamely opposed the amendment, drawing on his experience as the chief local prosecutor in the Minneapolis area. Freeman himself claimed to have brought 38 charges of illegal voting by felons in Hennepin County in the 2008 election, in which Al Franken won his Senate race by a grand total of 312 votes. More than a thousand felons who had no right to vote cast ballots in Minnesota in the 2008 election. John opens his book with Franken’s election and is well versed on the situation in Minnesota. In my view, he mopped the floor with Freeman.

The photo identification amendment is a matter of intense public interest in Minnesota. Given the backdrop of the incredibly close Senate election of 2008 and its nefarious consequences, it could not be otherwise. The debate drew a standing room only crowd.

The video below captures the opening couple of minutes of John Fund’s remarks. I’m sorry the video cuts off in midstream; he was in great form.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.