That’s still a fact. I’m agreeing with his point which is that acting against the seating of a Black to replace Obama will have ramifications for the jury. That was his point. It has nothing to do with Obama being president. It has everything to do with how the jury will perceive Blago appointing a Black to replace him, and the Senate speaking/acting against that appointment. Big time sympathy for Blago. And that’s likely part of the defense’s plan.
This is possible, (a) if the case ever gets in front of a jury, (b) if the members of the jury even know or care that he appointed a black to fill Obama's seat, and (c) if it is a point that the prosecution and defense teams explore during jury selection. More likely, Blago is trying to show he has made an appointment free of the play-for-pay scheme Fitzgerald claims was going on. The fact that Burris is black is icing on the cake, and I have no doubt Blago picked a black man precisely to make the appointment much harder for the senate Dems to reject.