Boy, after this Burris "revelation"- do you think Sec. Clinton should resign?

[IGotAName]

I remember her campaigning and raising funds for Obama's presidential campaign.

Then he won, and he turns around and appoints her Secretary of State.


Oh, how filthy. Oh, I'm shocked. Shocked.

:sarcasm:


So, here's the question- what's the difference between what Burris did and what Clinton did, and countless other ordinary political campaign tactics, for that matter?

Is it because Burris didn't own up to it to begin with? Why was the question even asked if all he did was what is exactly the usual in politics?

Also, keep in mind it sounds like the fundraising for Blago issue came up before it became known that Blago was being investigated.


So...I'm sorry, why are we crucifying this guy again?

[ProSense]

1. What? Let me expand:

What the hell does Hillary and Obama have to do with Burris and Blagojevich?

[Vincardog]

2. Um Obama raised funds to retire Clinton's debt. Burris said he didn't do it under oath

[IGotAName]

6. I was looking for that issue in the article I saw- it didn't say it

was while testifying. I looked at a couple of different articles- just said that he "said" these things.

Are you sure that's true?

[Vincardog]

11. I believe he was under oath when he testified before the Senate. I saw the testimony on TV

[IGotAName]

15. This article says he was under oath, but that he "quietly" amended his statement-

Here's the LBN article:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3743369&mesg_id=3743369

"In comments to reporters after appearing at a Democratic dinner, the senator several times contradicted his latest under-oath affidavit that he quietly filed with the Illinois House impeachment panel earlier this month. That affidavit was itself an attempt to clean up his live, sworn testimony to the panel Jan. 8, when he omitted his contacts with several Blagojevich insiders."

And that he wasn't straight with reporters.


Sounds like the "political climate" as described by another poster on this thread scared him enough to avoid the truth, even when the truth wasn't so bad.

[AZ Criminal JD]

21. He didn't raise any money for Blago

What's your point? He said he didn't do it and he didn't do it. No one has said he did.

[Hello_Kitty]

3. It's a witchhunt and I'm sick of it.

Apparently the GOP in IL has it out for this guy and the MSM is playing along because it looks like a "scandal". Fer fuck's sake, just let him serve out the 2 years and then have an election!

[babylonsister]

5. He lied to everyone; is that okay with you? If he was a rethug

we'd be screaming bloody murder.

[dkf]

7. It would be better if we had someone viable in there.

Burris isn't.

[ProSense]

10. Witchhunt?

The issue was Blagojevich tried to sell a Senate seat, and people were concerned that the appointment was tainted. Guess what: it was.

[IGotAName]

18. "It was."

OK, now you will see why my post is relevant:

Is Secretary Clinton's appointment tainted?

[ProSense]

28. Did Senator Clinton try to sell a Senate seat? Did Obama? Did any of them commit a crime?

It's a ridiculous comparison.

[IGotAName]

31. What I'm asking you is in what sense Burris' seat would have been honestly tainted

if he had simply come clean at the hearings, when Clinton did the same thing as he did (not do).

That's not to say that he still would have gotten the appointment, of course- he wouldn't have, despite not doing anything wrong- but just supposing that he did get it.

[ProSense]

38. "when Clinton did the same thing as he did " What??? Obama was under indictment?

You are comparing apples with oranges. Fundraising is not a crime. Fundraising for a person under indictment and charged with trying to sell a Senate seat taints the process.

Why is that so hard to understand?

[IGotAName]

40. #1- The fundraising at issue was before Blago's arrest, as I've noted

several times.

#2- Burris' appointment- his character- is separate from the person who appointed him and to be honestly evaluated he must be treated as an individual. Now, considering that the actions- campaigning- taken by these two people are the same, and the result nearly the same, how can you attack one person and not the other?

[ProSense]

41. No, it was not

here.

Still, not remotely the same thing.

[IGotAName]

42. Bad reporting by Josh.

Blago was arrested on December 9th.


Burris was talking to Blago's brother in November (after Obama won and it became clear the seat was being vacated- makes sense, yes?)

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/18/us/politics/18illinois.html?_r=1&ref=us


Then, after Blago was arrested, Burris either decided against the fundraising or he couldn't find anyone to donate. In any case, the fundraising was over. The point is, though, it began before Blago was arrested.

Then, because Burris knew what people like you would say (even though he hadn't done anything out of the ordinary), he tried to avoid what had been going on before the arrest.

So there you go.

[ProSense]

45. That wasn't "Josh" Check the second link:

But in his comments last night, Burris added new details.

“So some time shortly after Obama was elected, the brother called,” Burris said last night of Robert Blagojevich. “And now in the meantime, I’d talked to some people about trying to see if we could put a fund-raiser on. Nobody was—they said we aren’t giving money to the governor. And I said, ‘OK, you know, I can’t tell them what to do with their money.’”

“So when the (governor’s) brother called me back, I said, ‘Well, look Rob...I can’t raise any money from my friends. I said, maybe my partner and I, you can talk this over and see, could we go to some other people that we might be able to talk to that would help us out if we give--because we give a fundraiser in the law office, nobody going to show up. We’ll probably have a thousand dollars for you or something to that effect.'

Burris said prior to his final conversation with Robert Blagojevich in November he came to the conclusion that because of his interest in the Senate seat, he couldn’t raise money for the governor.

“I said, ‘No. 1, I can’t raise any money for you and I can’t give you any money because I don’t want to have a conflict,” Burris said he told Rob Blagojevich.

In a letter filed Feb. 5 with his latest affidavit,Burris said, "I did not donate or help raise a single dollar for the Governor from those conversations." But Burris didn't reveal that he tried to put a fundraiser together for Blagojevich--and failed because of a lack of donors--before deeming it inappropriate.

[IGotAName]

47. Right, pretty much what I said.

I think you're getting thrown off by the "while under consideration" for the Senate appointment part- that consideration began after Obama's election. That's when the idea came up, and I guess any efforts he may have made after the arrest you can chalk up to him being good for his word, even though he gave up when it became clear that no one was going to donate and it wasn't politically smart anyway.

[ProSense]

48. He was still discussing this in November. Whatever,

Burris withheld the information for a reason. There is probably a lot more to be disclosed about this episode.

[dkf]

4. Its not because he said he would, its because he lied about saying he would.

Two different things.

[IGotAName]

8. Why was the question being asked? Why would it have been

an issue if he had offered to campaign for Blago before he was being investigated?

[Vincardog]

13. When Blago was trying to sell the sentate seat it is a valid question to ask

"Have you offered anything of value to Blago?"

[IGotAName]

17. But that's a black and white question for an ethical gray area

that was distorted in any case by what was going on with Blago- I think even people's reaction to this latest news is a symptom of our not having a handle on exactly what kind of backscratching is acceptable in politics and what isn't.

Suddenly, people are only angry because he lied- not for what he did? Even before the Blago news broke?

Sounds like he didn't do anything wrong but wanted the seat and was intimidated into lying. The firestorm broke his integrity.

[Vincardog]

22. a black and white question with a black and white answer HE LIED

Aren't you a little tired of politicians lying to you after 8 years of B* BS?

[IGotAName]

24. Who's lying to whom?

You hold Burris to one standard and others to another?

Why does Burris get all the questions, get strung up for simply campaigning for someone else and then taking an appointment, when that's routine?

Why might someone who hadn't done anything wrong feel the need to lie about it?

Maybe because the very same media firestorm and lack of critical thinking that is going on right now confronted him at the time, and he knew that he would never have gotten the appointment even though he didn't do anything wrong if he had told the truth?

[dkf]

14. The question was being asked to find out if he participated in "pay for play" which is what Blago

was being investigated for.

"U.S. Sen. Roland Burris has acknowledged he sought to raise campaign funds for then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich at the request of the governor's brother at the same time he was making a pitch to be appointed to the Senate seat previously held by President Barack Obama.

Burris' latest comments in Peoria Monday night were the first time he has publicly said he was actively trying to raise money for Blagojevich. Previously Burris has left the impression that he always balked at the issue of raising money for the governor because of his interest in the Senate appointment.

In comments to reporters after appearing at a Democratic dinner, the senator several times contradicted his latest under-oath affidavit that he quietly filed with the Illinois House impeachment panel earlier this month. That affidavit was itself an attempt to clean up his live, sworn testimony to the panel Jan. 8, when he omitted his contacts with several Blagojevich insiders."

http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/02/burris_now_admits_he_tried_to_raise_money_for_blago.php

[AZ Criminal JD]

23. He didn't lie

He didn't raise any money. Don't you know what the facts are or are you just pulling crap from your ass?

[dkf]

30. He tried to raise campaign money...but nobody wanted to give to Blago.

From the Burris Transcript:

“So some time shortly after Obama was elected, the brother called. I’d talked to some people about trying to see if we could put a fund-raiser on. Nobody was—they said we aren’t giving money to the governor. And I said, ‘OK, you know, I can’t tell them what to do with their money.’"

“So when the brother called me back, I said, ‘Well, look Rob...I can’t raise any money from my friends. I said, maybe my partner and I, you can talk this over and see, could we go to some other people that we might be able to talk to that would help us out if we give--because we give a fund-raiser in the law office, nobody going to show up. We’ll probably have a thousand dollars for you or something to that effect.'"

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/clout_st/2009/02/burris-unscripted-more-details-about-blagojevich-contacts.html

[AZ Criminal JD]

34. You just made my point.

He didn't raise any money and he was given the seat anyway. Whether he wanted to if he could is not the issue. He was asked and said no he couldn't. That defeats Fitzgerald's allegations.

[dkf]

37. But he offered to find people who would give.

Here I'll repost the relevant portion:

"maybe my partner and I, you can talk this over and see, could we go to some other people that we might be able to talk to that would help us out if we give...We’ll probably have a thousand dollars for you or something to that effect.'"

[AZ Criminal JD]

51. You don't know much about Illinois politics

A thousand dollars would be an insult to an Illinois office holder. They require at least 100k to do anything for you. The fact that Burris got the job and didn't give Blago a dime defeats the allegations Fitzgerald made and Fitz will lose this in court if it ever gets there.

[grantcart]

9. Blago was trying to sell his seat and Burris pretended that he had no

involvement and misled the Impeachment committee and the Senate Leadership that he had disclosed everything, he had not.


Senator Clinton already had a substantial job and wasn't out looking for a new position.


How you could relate these two issues is beyond me.

[pinto]

12. Oh, geez. That's a stretch.

[PBS Poll-435]

16. Leave Blago Alone!

:cry:

[SpartanDem]

19. Stop with the witchhunt BS

This guy is dirty and has been since day one. You really must be blind if you think there no difference in being asked to fundraise for a guy accused trying to sell the seat that you've been lobbying for.

[IGotAName]

20. The fundraising issue came up before Blago was arrested.

Blago was arrested in December:

http://news.google.com/archivesearch?hl=en&tab=wn&ned=us&q=blagojevich+arrested&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&sugg=d&as_ldate=2008&as_hdate=2008&lnav=d1b&ldrange=2000,2007&hdrange=2009,2009

Whereas Burris talked to Blago's brother in November:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/18/us/politics/18illinois.html?ref=us

[JimGinPA]

25. It's Never The Crime, It's Always The Coverup

Is that a cliche'?

[IGotAName]

26. So, here's a question: What caused the coverup?

Why would he lie, when he didn't do anything wrong?

[RepublicanElephant]

27. burris got an electable position and does not serve at the pleasure of the president.

no comparison to clinton.

[opihimoimoi]

29. He is TOAST ...he lied under oath.....

[TexasObserver]

32. What doesn't smell right about this topic?

Is it your attempt to use Hillary to establish that politicians do things for other politicians, and expect appointments in return?

Is it the Limbaughesque false choice between two posited items, as if stating they are similar makes them similar?

I know your game, but let's do see it play itself out.

[IGotAName]

35. Your nose is off.

Nice attempt at avoiding thinking critically, though.


I've been around quite awhile and Skinner already knows about the change.

[Starry Messenger]

33. He's being crucified?

Sounds ouchy to me.

And no, I don't think Sec. Clinton should resign. I would post the bunny/pancake picture, but I'm too lazy right now.

[Beacool]

36. Your analogy is faulty, even if done in jest.

Hillary was not gunning for the SOS in exchange for campaigning for Obama. There was no quid pro quo. It took some convincing to get her to agree to it, go ask Biden if you don't think so.

;-)

[IGotAName]

39. Oh, but of course. She never even wanted to be SOS.

Or support from Obama in any sense. Being President, he never could have helped her with something she needed to get done.


You're actually onto something with what you're saying, despite my sarcasm- I think that's the sense of corruption that we allow in politics. But...I'm sure you can see what's wrong with even that sense of ethics.


I suppose somebody could have just given Blago the $15 million foundation, if he'd never asked for it, and then he could have conveniently discovered that he had this Senate appointment sitting in his back pocket after he saw the money sitting on his doorstep and given it to the person whose name was on the check. No discussion, no nothing. You think that would have been any less corrupted?

[Beacool]

50. Excuse me, but it was the other way around.

Obama needed her support to bring over many of her supporters who were reluctant at first to toe the party line. It was a mutual thing, in politics one hand always washes the other.

;)

[dkf]

43. She was trying to heal a rift, and good for her.

This is a pretty ridiculous comparison.

[IGotAName]

46. She didn't do anything wrong, dkf. nt

[dkf]

49. Wrong? What?

Who?

:shrug:

[marshall]

44. Obama wasn't auctioning off the SOS to the highest bidder

Favors are repaid in politics. Certainly Blago would not have been out of line to expect some kind of payback, however minor, for appointing somebody to senator, even if it's just dinner out whenever he's in DC or some other kind of fair and legal assistance or recognition. If nothing else he should have expected to have a friendly ear in congress--not somebody who would bend the rules but just somebody who would have an open door. Blago took things to a whole new and very crass level.

[ecstatic]

52. Interesting, but I guess it only becomes "pay to play" if the appointer is

accused of "pay to play?" :shrug: