<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<oembed>
	<version>1.0</version>
	<type>link</type>
	<objectid>155024</objectid>
	<title><![CDATA[Harry Reid: The Most Corrupt of the Corrupt?]]></title>
	<url>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-norman/harry-reid-the-most-corru_b_155024.html</url>
	<abstract><![CDATA[<p>After I linked in an earlier <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-norman/blagojevich-on-firmer-gro_b_154402.html">post</a> to the analyses of legal scholars who had opined that the Senate isn't authorized to deny the duly appointed Roland Burris membership in its club, several other preeminent jurists came forth with a different conclusion based on reasoning that the first group had apparently overlooked. <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2207754/">Akhil Reed Amar</a>, <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2207754/">Josh Chafetz</a>, <a href="ttp://balkin.blogspot.com/2008/12/can-senate-refuse-to-seat-ronald-burris.html">Jack Balkin</a>, <a href="http://www.politico.com/arena/archive/119.html#6EA67A3C-35BA-4528-9C0F-1692DB799C47">Walter Dellinger</a> and <a href="http://www.forbes.com/2009/01/02/blagojevich-burris-constitution-oped-cx_lt_0102tribe.html">Lawrence Tribe</a> say it's irrelevant that an appointee's qualifications may be judged...</p>]]></abstract>
	<taxonomy><![CDATA[Politics]]></taxonomy>
	<date_published>2009-01-05T12:52:00-05:00</date_published>
</oembed>
