He said Granholm's political identity is tied in part to her long-standing support of African Americans and their rights. Swooping in to remove a mayor who remains popular with many Detroiters would create a strong political backlash.

Which is precisely why that particular motion moving through the council was the last thing the Gov wanted.  Now you've got African American Democrats on the Detroit City Council asking a Democrat Governor to remove an African American Democrat mayor.  So it's a wash, right?  Wrong.  Kwame still owns the get-out-the-vote machine in the D and has a fiercely loyal base of support.  The man could literally lie, cheat and steal (see the front page of any newspaper in the region... daily) and they'd stand by their man.  

And the way their hero is being "persecuted" these days, it's a good bet many expect a governor who's never quite seen eye to eye with him anyways to act punitively.  

So now the constant questions and the waiting game start.  Until there's some sort of resolution, something that might not happen, literally, for years, the question of removal from Lansing will hang over both Granholm and Kilpatrick's heads.  

If she begins removal proceedings she might start a riot.  If she ignores the issue is sits and festers and Kwame loyalists presume the worst.  Of course there's a third option.  She could issue an official statement declining to pursue the Council's suggestion and letting the Mayor off the hook.  Sure there's an old archaic law on the books that lets the State's top dog remove locals for things like, no lie, excessive drunkenness.  But Lansing swooping in to remove local elected officials when the locals have the ability and the means to rise up and clean house on their own?  Pass.

Of course, for the Governor there's plenty of heat in that kitchen too but at least she'd have the satisfaction of knowing she'd done the right thing, for once.