tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6163899.post7196857582658399679..comments2023-10-22T10:41:47.141-04:00Comments on Samantha Pierce: Monday Morning MinutesSamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08521007829712936219noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6163899.post-58073226104452934942009-03-03T07:26:00.000-05:002009-03-03T07:26:00.000-05:00When Burris was seated, there was no public eviden...When Burris was seated, there was no public evidence that he had been involved in shady deals with Blago. Everyone thought he had chosen Burris as a final way to have his say in this situation without picking someone involved with the discussions he was being investigated for.<BR/><BR/>As for as the law goes, it was fully within the governor's power to appoint him, and it wasn't within the Senate's power to refuse to seat him, so there's not really anything they could legally do, even if they didn't like the fact that he was still getting to appoint someone.<BR/><BR/>But now there's an ethical issue that Burris himself had been involved with, and I do think the Senate has the authority to unseat him. It's curious that they haven't, especially given that with him (and without Franken) the Democrats need more senators to break a filibuster than they would if they only had a Senate of 98 people. It makes me wonder if the only thing keeping him there is that he's black.Jeremy Piercehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03441308872350317672noreply@blogger.com