Posted by Jed Lewison on Tue Dec 30, 2008 at 9:41 PM Pacific

"Presumed innocent until proven guilty"

This is the most absurd defense in the world for allowing Blago to make a senatorial appointment.

First, there's no question but that Blago aimed to sell the U.S. Senate seat. Just listen to him, in his own words.

That being said, I of course agree that within the context of the criminal justice system, Blago should not be sentenced to prison until convicted.

But let's not forget that when someone is indicted, they very often go to jail, and they either post bond or sit in prison while they await trial.

It's true that they are presumed innocent, but it's also true that they are not free and clear to roam the streets as they please.

Even when released on bond, the court has the power to impose on them restrictions regarding their activity.

So here's the point I'm making: even in the criminal justice system, when somebody is presumed innocent, they still have restrictions placed up on them.

We can debate the merits of that, I suppose, but I cannot for the life of me see an argument for why Blagojevich should be able to make an appointment to the Senate when there are perfectly legal means of stopping his appointment.

And let's not forget that the standards for evidence here are different than in a criminal trial.

Bottom-line: I don't care who it is that Blago appoints. As long as he's doing the appointing, that appointment is tainted, and it should not stand.